Why the study?
Many severe aortic stenosis cases remain undetected or untreated, with a persistent male bias among patients undergoing aortic valve replacement.
Does an artificial intelligence automated alert system improve the detection of severe aortic stenosis in adults undergoing transthoracic echocardiography compared to routine clinical diagnosis?
Does an artificial intelligence automated alert system improve the detection of severe aortic stenosis in adults undergoing transthoracic echocardiography compared to routine clinical diagnosis?
An AI automated alert system applied to routine echocardiograms significantly increases the detection of severe aortic stenosis, particularly addressing the under-diagnosis and under-treatment of women.
AI alerts may aid severe AS detection and reduce sex disparities in diagnosis; hypothesis-generating and requires prospective validation before practice change.
Many severe aortic stenosis (AS) cases are undetected and/or not considered for potentially life-saving treatment, with a persistent male-bias reported among those undergoing aortic valve replacement (AVR). We evaluated the clinical value of a validated artificial intelligence automated alert system (AI-AAS) that detects severe AS from routine echocardiographic measurements. In a retrospective, clinical cohort of 21,749 adults investigated with transthoracic echocardiography at two tertiary-referral centres, we identified 4057 women (aged 61.6 ± 18.1 years) and 5132 men (60.8 ± 17.5 years) with native aortic valves. We firstly applied the AI-AAS to the cardiologists' reported echo measurements, to detect all AS cases, including guideline-defined severe AS. Two expert clinicians then independently reviewed the original clinical diagnosis/management based on the initial report. Initially, 218/9189 (2.4 %, 95%CI 2.1-2.7 %) severe AS cases were diagnosed. The AI-AAS subsequently increased this number by 158 (52 % women) to 376 cases (4.1 %, 95%CI 3.7-4.5 %) of severe guideline-defined AS. Overall, more women were under-diagnosed (92/169 [54.4 %] versus 80/207 [38.6 %] men - adjusted odds ratio [aOR] 0.21, 95%CI 0.10-0.45). Even when accounting for potential contraindications to valvular intervention, women were persistently less likely to be considered for valvular intervention (aOR 0.54, 95%CI 0.31-0.95) and/or underwent AVR (aOR 0.29, 95%CI 0.09-0.74). Our study suggests an AI-AAS application that is agnostic to gender, haemodynamic bias, symptoms, or clinical factors, provides an objective alert to severe forms of AS (including guideline-defined severe AS) following a routine echocardiogram, and has the potential to increase the number of people (especially women) directed towards more definitive treatment/specialist care.
No takes yet. Share an insight, caveat, or question.
Strange et al. (2024) studied this question.
Synapse has enriched 5 closely related papers on similar clinical questions. Consider them for comparative context: