In this review, we focused on the applicability of artificial intelligence (AI) for opportunistic abdominal aortic aneurysm (AAA) detection in computed tomography (CT). We used the academic search system PubMed as the primary source for the literature search and Google Scholar as a supplementary source of evidence. We searched through 2 February 2022. All studies on automated AAA detection or segmentation in noncontrast abdominal CT were included. For bias assessment, we developed and used an adapted version of the QUADAS-2 checklist. We included eight studies with 355 cases, of which 273 (77%) contained AAA. The highest risk of bias and level of applicability concerns were observed for the “patient selection” domain, due to the 100% pathology rate in the majority (75%) of the studies. The mean sensitivity value was 95% (95% CI 100–87%), the mean specificity value was 96.6% (95% CI 100–75.7%), and the mean accuracy value was 95.2% (95% CI 100–54.5%). Half of the included studies performed diagnostic accuracy estimation, with only one study having data on all diagnostic accuracy metrics. Therefore, we conducted a narrative synthesis. Our findings indicate high study heterogeneity, requiring further research with balanced noncontrast CT datasets and adherence to reporting standards in order to validate the high sensitivity value obtained.

BACKGROUND: The markup of medical image datasets is based on the subjective interpretation of the observed entities by radiologists. There is currently no widely accepted protocol for determining ground truth based on radiologists reports. AIM: To assess the accuracy of radiologist interpretations and their agreement for the publicly available dataset CTLungCa-500, as well as the relationship between these parameters and the number of independent readers of CT scans. MATERIALS AND METHODS: Thirty-four radiologists took part in the dataset markup. The dataset included 536 patients who were at high risk of developing lung cancer. For each scan, six radiologists worked independently to create a report. After that, an arbitrator reviewed the lesions discovered by them. The number of true-positive, false-positive, true-negative, and false-negative findings was calculated for each reader to assess diagnostic accuracy. Further, the inter-observer variability was analyzed using the percentage agreement metric. RESULTS: An increase in the number of independent readers providing CT scan interpretations leads to accuracy increase associated with a decrease in agreement. The majority of disagreements were associated with the presence of a lung nodule in a specific site of the CT scan. CONCLUSION: If arbitration is provided, an increase in the number of independent initial readers can improve their combined accuracy. The experience and diagnostic accuracy of individual readers have no bearing on the quality of a crowd-tagging annotation. At four independent readings per CT scan, the optimal balance of markup accuracy and cost was achieved.

The proposed ultrasound imaging mode allows detection of objects, which essentially differ in their scattering properties from the surrounding tissues and liquids. The objects in question are...