Key result
Visual transformers trail cardiologists in scoring echo image quality, yielding ~47% higher error rates.
Why the study?
High-quality echocardiography is essential for accurate assessment of cardiac function, and an AI-based approach may enable automated image quality assessment.
Does an artificial intelligence-based algorithm accurately predict transthoracic echocardiographic image quality compared to human experts in ICD/CRT-D candidates?
Cross-Sectional (n=248)
No
Does an artificial intelligence-based algorithm accurately predict transthoracic echocardiographic image quality compared to human experts in ICD/CRT-D candidates?
AI models can predict echocardiographic image quality with good correlation but currently have higher error rates than human experts, requiring further refinement and validation.
AI models correlate with expert echo quality scores yet show higher errors; leaves open clinical adoption pending prospective validation.
BACKGROUND: High-quality echocardiography is essential for accurate and reproducible assessment of cardiac functional indices, which are highly dependent on adequate image quality and proper probe alignment. An artificial intelligence (AI)-based approach may enable automated image quality assessment. AIMS: Our aim was to develop and internally validate an AI-based algorithm to predict image quality from selected echocardiographic frames in candidates for implantable cardioverter-defibrillator and cardiac resynchronization therapy with a defibrillator implantation. METHODS: In this retrospective cross-sectional study, 248 patients (297 echocardiographic examinations) were included. Demographic, electrocardiographic, echocardiographic, and clinical data were collected. Apical 2-, 3-, and 4-chamber views were extracted for image quality analysis, yielding a total of 909 echocardiograms. Image quality was assessed using end-diastolic frames. An internally validated scoring framework was applied, demonstrating high interclass correlation. RESULTS: Regression models provided more clinically relevant information than classification models. Visual transformer models achieved Pearson correlation coefficients similar to those of convolutional neural networks (up to 0.812 and 0.772, respectively; P = 0.31). Architectures trained on end-diastolic frames achieved comparable Pearson correlation coefficients to those trained on combined end-diastolic and end-systolic frames. Compared with human experts, the models showed significantly higher absolute percentage errors, with values of 11%-12% (median) vs. 7.9% (mean) for the total image quality score and 13%-14% (median) vs. 8.8% (mean) for the border quality score. CONCLUSIONS: Regression models demonstrated the highest performance. An internally validated AI model can predict an echocardiographic image quality score in a small cohort of cardiac resynchronization therapy with a defibrillator/implantable cardioverter-defibrillator candidates. However, external and prospective validation will be required to establish its generalizability, reliability, and utility before clinical application.
No takes yet. Share an insight, caveat, or question.
Nazar et al. (2026) conducted a cross-sectional in Heart failure with reduced ejection fraction (ICD/CRT-D candidates) (n=248). Artificial intelligence-based algorithm (Visual Transformer and Convolutional Neural Network) vs. Human experts was evaluated on Absolute percentage error for total image quality score (p=<0.001). Visual transformer models achieved Pearson correlation coefficients up to 0.812 for predicting echocardiographic image quality, but had significantly higher absolute percentage errors compared to human experts (11.6% vs 7.9%, p<0.001).
Synapse has enriched 5 closely related papers on similar clinical questions. Consider them for comparative context: