Scoping review shows AI's potential in prenatal ultrasound for congenital heart disease, suggesting improved accuracy and training for clinicians.
Congenital heart diseases (CHD) are a significant cause of neonatal mortality and morbidity. Detecting these abnormalities during pregnancy increases survival rates, enhances prognosis, and improves pregnancy management and quality of life for the affected families. Foetal echocardiography can be considered an accurate method for detecting CHDs. However, the detection of CHDs can be limited by factors such as the sonographer's skill, expertise and patient specific variables. Using artificial intelligence (AI) has the potential to address these challenges, increasing antenatal CHD detection during prenatal care. A scoping review was conducted using Google Scholar, PubMed, and ScienceDirect databases, employing keywords, Boolean operators, and inclusion and exclusion criteria to identify peer-reviewed studies. Thematic mapping and synthesis of the found literature were conducted to review key concepts, research methods and findings. A total of n = 233 articles were identified, after exclusion criteria, the focus was narrowed to n = 7 that met the inclusion criteria. Themes in the literature identified the potential of AI to assist clinicians and trainees, alongside emerging new ethical limitations in ultrasound imaging. AI-based tools in ultrasound imaging offer great potential in assisting sonographers and doctors with decision-making in CHD diagnosis. However, due to the paucity of data and small sample sizes, further research and technological advancements are needed to improve reliability and integrate AI into routine clinical practice. This scoping review identified the reported accuracy and limitations of AI-based tools within foetal cardiac ultrasound imaging. AI has the potential to aid in reducing missed diagnoses, enhance training, and improve pregnancy management. There is a need to understand and address the ethical and legal considerations involved with this new paradigm in imaging.
No takes yet. Share an insight, caveat, or question.
Norris et al. (2025) studied this question.
Synapse has enriched 5 closely related papers on similar clinical questions. Consider them for comparative context: