Artificial Intelligence in the Management of Intracranial Aneurysms: Current Status and Future Perspectives

References

1. 1.↵
   1. Vlak MH,
   2. Algra A,
   3. Brandenburg R, et al

   . Prevalence of unruptured intracranial aneurysms, with emphasis on sex, age, comorbidity, country, and time period: a systematic review and meta-analysis. Lancet Neurol 2011;10:626–36 doi:10.1016/S1474-4422(11)70109-0 pmid:21641282

   CrossRefPubMedWeb of Science
2. 2.↵
   1. Li MH,
   2. Chen SW,
   3. Li YD, et al

   . Prevalence of unruptured cerebral aneurysms in Chinese adults aged 35 to 75 years: a cross-sectional study. Ann Intern Med 2013;159:514–21 doi:10.7326/0003-4819-159-8-201310150-00004 pmid:24126645

   CrossRefPubMed
3. 3.↵
   1. Boland GW,
   2. Guimaraes AS,
   3. Mueller PR

   . The radiologist’s conundrum: benefits and costs of increasing CT capacity and utilization. Eur Radiol 2009;19:9–11 doi:10.1007/s00330-008-1159-7 pmid:18766347

   CrossRefPubMedWeb of Science
4. 4.↵
   1. McDonald RJ,
   2. Schwartz KM,
   3. Eckel LJ, et al

   . The effects of changes in utilization and technological advancements of cross sectional imaging on radiologist workload. Acad Radiol 2015;22:1191–98 doi:10.1016/j.acra.2015.05.007 pmid:26210525

   CrossRefPubMed
5. 5.↵
   1. Morita A,
   2. Kirino T,
   3. Hashi K, et al

   ; UCAS Japan Investigators. The natural course of unruptured cerebral aneurysms in a Japanese cohort. N Engl J Med 2012;366:2474–82 doi:10.1056/NEJMoa1113260 pmid:22738097

   CrossRefPubMedWeb of Science
6. 6.↵
   1. Naggara ON,
   2. Lecler A,
   3. Oppenheim C, et al

   . Endovascular treatment of intracranial unruptured aneurysms: a systematic review of the literature on safety with emphasis on subgroup analyses. Radiology 2012;263:828–35 doi:10.1148/radiol.12112114 pmid:22623696

   CrossRefPubMedWeb of Science
7. 7.↵
   1. He J,
   2. Baxter SL,
   3. Xu J, et al

   . The practical implementation of artificial intelligence technologies in medicine. Nat Med 2019;25:30–36 doi:10.1038/s41591-018-0307-0 pmid:30617336

   CrossRefPubMed
8. 8.↵
   1. Zhou ZH

   . A brief introduction to weakly supervised learning. Natl Sci Rev 2018;5:45–53 doi:10.1093/nsr/nwx106

   CrossRef
9. 9.↵
   1. LeCun Y,
   2. Bengio Y,
   3. Hinton G

   . Deep learning. Nature 2015;521:436–44 doi:10.1038/nature14539 pmid:26017442

   CrossRefPubMed
10. 10.↵
    1. Dey D,
    2. Slomka PJ,
    3. Leeson P, et al

    . Artificial intelligence in cardiovascular imaging: JACC state-of-the-art review. J Am Coll Cardiol 2019;73:1317–35 doi:10.1016/j.jacc.2018.12.054 pmid:30898208

    FREE Full Text
11. 11.↵
    1. Paliwal N,
    2. Jaiswal P,
    3. Tutino VM, et al

    . Outcome prediction of intracranial aneurysm treatment by flow diverters using machine learning. Neurosurg Focus 2018;45:E7 doi:10.3171/2018.8.FOCUS18332 pmid:30453461

    CrossRefPubMed
12. 12.↵
    1. Varble N,
    2. Tutino VM,
    3. Yu J, et al

    . Shared and distinct rupture discriminants of small and large intracranial aneurysms. Stroke 2018;49:856–64 doi:10.1161/STROKEAHA.117.019929 pmid:29535267

    Abstract/FREE Full Text
13. 13.↵
    1. Litjens G,
    2. Kooi T,
    3. Bejnordi BE, et al

    . A survey on deep learning in medical image analysis. Med Image Anal 2017;42:60–88 doi:10.1016/j.media.2017.07.005 pmid:28778026

    CrossRefPubMed
14. 14.↵
    1. Bechan RS,
    2. van Rooij SB,
    3. Sprengers ME, et al

    . CT angiography versus 3D rotational angiography in patients with subarachnoid hemorrhage. Neuroradiology 2015;57:1239–46 doi:10.1007/s00234-015-1590-9 pmid:26341107

    CrossRefPubMed
15. 15.↵
    1. Schalekamp S,
    2. van Ginneken B,
    3. Koedam E, et al

    . Computer-aided detection improves detection of pulmonary nodules in chest radiographs beyond the support by bone-suppressed images. Radiology 2014;272:252–61 doi:10.1148/radiol.14131315 pmid:24635675

    CrossRefPubMed
16. 16.↵
    1. De Fauw J,
    2. Ledsam JR,
    3. Romera-Paredes B, et al

    . Clinically applicable deep learning for diagnosis and referral in retinal disease. Nat Med 2018;24:1342–50 doi:10.1038/s41591-018-0107-6 pmid:30104768

    CrossRefPubMed
17. 17.↵
    1. Yang X,
    2. Blezek DJ,
    3. Cheng LTE, et al

    . Computer-aided detection of intracranial aneurysms in MR angiography. J Digit Imaging 2011;24:86–95 doi:10.1007/s10278-009-9254-0 pmid:19937083

    CrossRefPubMed
18. 18.↵
    1. Arimura H,
    2. Li Q,
    3. Korogi Y, et al

    . Automated computerized scheme for detection of unruptured intracranial aneurysms in three dimensional magnetic resonance angiography. Acad Radiol 2004;11:1093–1104 doi:10.1016/j.acra.2004.07.011 pmid:15530802

    CrossRefPubMed
19. 19.↵
    1. Hirai T,
    2. Korogi Y,
    3. Arimura H, et al

    . Intracranial aneurysms at MR angiography: effect of computer-aided diagnosis on radiologists’ detection performance. Radiology 2005;237:605–10 doi:10.1148/radiol.2372041734 pmid:16179404

    CrossRefPubMedWeb of Science
20. 20.↵
    1. Kakeda S,
    2. Korogi Y,
    3. Arimura H, et al

    . Diagnostic accuracy and reading time to detect intracranial aneurysms on MR angiography using a computer-aided diagnosis system. AJR Am J Roentgenol 2008;190:459–65 doi:10.2214/AJR.07.2642 pmid:18212233

    CrossRefPubMed
21. 21.↵
    1. Jin Z,
    2. Arimura H,
    3. Kakeda S, et al

    . An ellipsoid convex enhancement filter for detection of asymptomatic intracranial aneurysm candidates in CAD frameworks. Med Phys 2016;43:951–60 doi:10.1118/1.4940349 pmid:26843255

    CrossRefPubMed
22. 22.↵
    1. Nakao T,
    2. Hanaoka S,
    3. Nomura Y, et al

    . Deep neural network-based computer-assisted detection of cerebral aneurysms in MR angiography. J Magn Reson Imaging 2018;47:948–53 doi:10.1002/jmri.25842 pmid:28836310

    CrossRefPubMed
23. 23.↵
    1. Stember JN,
    2. Chang P,
    3. Stember DM, et al

    . Convolutional neural networks for the detection and measurement of cerebral aneurysms on magnetic resonance angiography. J Digit Imaging 2019;32:808–15 doi:10.1007/s10278-018-0162-z pmid:30511281

    CrossRefPubMed
24. 24.↵
    1. Sichtermann T,
    2. Faron A,
    3. Sijben R, et al

    . Deep learning–based detection of intracranial aneurysms in 3D TOF-MRA. AJNR Am J Neuroradiol 2019;40:25–32 doi:10.3174/ajnr.A5911 pmid:30573461

    Abstract/FREE Full Text
25. 25.↵
    1. Ueda D,
    2. Yamamoto A,
    3. Nishimori M, et al

    . Deep learning for MR angiography: Automated detection of cerebral aneurysms. Radiology 2019;290:187–94 doi:10.1148/radiol.2018180901 pmid:30351253

    CrossRefPubMed
26. 26.↵
    1. Park A,
    2. Chute C,
    3. Rajpurkar P, et al

    . Deep learning–assisted diagnosis of cerebral aneurysms using the HeadXNet model. JAMA Netw Open 2019;2:e195600 doi:10.1001/jamanetworkopen.2019.5600 pmid:31173130

    CrossRefPubMed
27. 27.↵
    1. Miki S,
    2. Hayashi N,
    3. Masutani Y, et al

    . Computer-assisted detection of cerebral aneurysms in MR angiography in a routine image-reading environment: effects on diagnosis by radiologists. AJNR Am J Neuroradiol 2016;37:1038–43 doi:10.3174/ajnr.A4671 pmid:26892988

    Abstract/FREE Full Text
28. 28.↵
    1. Maldaner N,
    2. Stienen MN,
    3. Bijlenga P, et al

    . Interrater agreement in the radiologic characterization of ruptured intracranial aneurysms based on computed tomography angiography. World Neurosurg 2017;103:876–82 doi:10.1016/j.wneu.2017.04.131 pmid:28461281

    CrossRefPubMed
29. 29.↵
    1. Suh SH,
    2. Cloft HJ,
    3. Huston J, et al

    . Interobserver variability of aneurysm morphology: discrimination of the daughter sac. J Neurointerv Surg 2016;8:38–41 doi:10.1136/neurintsurg-2014-011471 pmid:25385747

    Abstract/FREE Full Text
30. 30.↵
    1. Larrabide I,
    2. Cruz Villa-Uriol M,
    3. Cárdenes R, et al

    . Three-dimensional morphological analysis of intracranial aneurysms: a fully automated method for aneurysm sac isolation and quantification. Med Phys 2011;38:2439–49 doi:10.1118/1.3575417 pmid:21776779

    CrossRefPubMed
31. 31.↵
    1. Piccinelli M,
    2. Steinman DA,
    3. Hoi Y, et al

    . Automatic neck plane detection and 3D geometric characterization of aneurysmal sacs. Ann Biomed Eng 2012;40:2188–2211 doi:10.1007/s10439-012-0577-5 pmid:22532324

    CrossRefPubMed
32. 32.↵
    1. Xiang J,
    2. Antiga L,
    3. Varble N, et al

    . AView: An image-based clinical computational tool for intracranial aneurysm flow visualization and clinical management. Ann Biomed Eng 2016;44:1085–96 doi:10.1007/s10439-015-1363-y pmid:26101034

    CrossRefPubMed
33. 33.↵
    1. Rajabzadeh-Oghaz H,
    2. Varble N,
    3. Davies JM, et al

    . Computer-assisted adjuncts for aneurysmal morphology assessment: toward more precise and accurate approaches. Proc SPIE Int Soc Opt Eng 2017;10134 doi:10.1117/12.2255553 pmid:28867867

    CrossRefPubMed
34. 34.↵
    1. Rajabzadeh-Oghaz H,
    2. Varble N,
    3. Shallwani H, et al

    . Computer-assisted 3D morphology evaluation of intracranial aneurysms. World Neurosurg 2018;119:e541–50 doi:10.1016/j.wneu.2018.07.208 pmid:30075262

    CrossRefPubMed
35. 35.↵
    1. Can A,
    2. Du R

    . Association of hemodynamic factors with intracranial aneurysm formation and rupture: systematic review and meta-analysis. Neurosurgery 2016;78:510–20 doi:10.1227/NEU.0000000000001083 pmid:26516819

    CrossRefPubMed
36. 36.↵
    1. Seo JH,
    2. Eslami P,
    3. Caplan J, et al

    . A highly automated computational method for modeling of intracranial aneurysm hemodynamics. Front Physiol 2018;9:681 doi:10.3389/fphys.2018.00681 pmid:29946264

    CrossRefPubMed
37. 37.↵
    1. Cebral JR,
    2. Vazquez M,
    3. Sforza DM, et al

    . Analysis of hemodynamics and wall mechanics at sites of cerebral aneurysm rupture. J Neurointerv Surg 2015;7:530–36 doi:10.1136/neurintsurg-2014-011247 pmid:24827066

    Abstract/FREE Full Text
38. 38.↵
    1. Liu J,
    2. Chen Y,
    3. Lan L, et al

    . Prediction of rupture risk in anterior communicating artery aneurysms with a feed-forward artificial neural network. Eur Radiology 2018;28:3268–75 doi:10.1007/s00330-017-5300-3 pmid:29476219

    CrossRefPubMed
39. 39.↵
    1. Liu Q,
    2. Jiang P,
    3. Jiang Y, et al

    . Prediction of aneurysm stability using a machine learning model based on PyRadiomics-derived morphological features. Stroke 2019;50:2314–21 doi:10.1161/STROKEAHA.119.025777 pmid:31288671

    CrossRefPubMed
40. 40.↵
    1. Detmer FJ,
    2. Lückehe D,
    3. Mut F, et al

    . Comparison of statistical learning approaches for cerebral aneurysm rupture assessment. Int J Comput Assist Radiology Surg 2019;15:141–50 doi:10.1007/s11548-019-02065-2 pmid:31485987

    CrossRefPubMed
41. 41.↵
    1. Silva MA,
    2. Patel J,
    3. Kavouridis V, et al

    . Machine learning models can detect aneurysm rupture and identify clinical features associated with rupture. World Neurosurg 2019;131:e46–51 doi:10.1016/j.wneu.2019.06.231 pmid:31295616

    CrossRefPubMed
42. 42.↵
    1. Dumont TM,
    2. Rughani AI,
    3. Tranmer BI

    . Prediction of symptomatic cerebral vasospasm after aneurysmal subarachnoid hemorrhage with an artificial neural network: feasibility and comparison with logistic regression models. World Neurosurg 2011;75:57–63 doi:10.1016/j.wneu.2010.07.007 pmid:21492664

    CrossRefPubMed
43. 43.↵
    1. Adams HP Jr.,
    2. Kassell NF,
    3. Torner JC, et al

    . Predicting cerebral ischemia after aneurysmal subarachnoid hemorrhage: influences of clinical condition, CT results, and antifibrinolytic therapy: a report of the cooperative aneurysm study. Neurology 1987;37:1586–91 doi:10.1212/wnl.37.10.1586 pmid:3658161

    CrossRefPubMed
44. 44.↵
    1. Qureshi AI,
    2. Sung GY,
    3. Razumovsky AY, et al

    . Early identification of patients at risk for symptomatic vasospasm after aneurysmal subarachnoid hemorrhage. Crit Care Med 2000;28:984–90 doi:10.1097/00003246-200004000-00012 pmid:10809270

    CrossRefPubMedWeb of Science
45. 45.↵
    1. Dumont TM

    . Prospective assessment of a symptomatic cerebral vasospasm predictive neural network model. World Neurosurg 2016;94:126–30 doi:10.1016/j.wneu.2016.06.110 pmid:27392898

    CrossRefPubMed
46. 46.↵
    1. Ramos LA,
    2. van der Steen WE,
    3. Sales Barros R, et al

    . Machine learning improves prediction of delayed cerebral ischemia in patients with subarachnoid hemorrhage. J Neurointerv Surg 2019;11:497–502 doi:10.1136/neurintsurg-2018-014258 pmid:30415227

    Abstract/FREE Full Text
47. 47.↵
    1. Tanioka S,
    2. Ishida F,
    3. Nakano F, et al

    . Machine learning analysis of matricellular proteins and clinical variables for early prediction of delayed cerebral ischemia after aneurysmal subarachnoid hemorrhage. Mol Neurobiol 2019;56:7128–35 doi:10.1007/s12035-019-1601-7 pmid:30989629

    CrossRefPubMed
48. 48.↵
    1. Rubbert C,
    2. Patil KR,
    3. Beseoglu K, et al

    . Prediction of outcome after aneurysmal subarachnoid haemorrhage using data from patient admission. Eur Radiol 2018;28:4949–58 doi:10.1007/s00330-018-5505-0 pmid:29948072

    CrossRefPubMed
49. 49.↵
    1. Brinjikji W,
    2. Murad MH,
    3. Lanzino G, et al

    . Endovascular treatment of intracranial aneurysms with flow diverters: a meta-analysis. Stroke 2013;44:442–47 doi:10.1161/STROKEAHA.112.678151 pmid:23321438

    Abstract/FREE Full Text
50. 50.↵
    1. Christodoulou E,
    2. Ma J,
    3. Collins GS, et al

    . A systematic review shows no performance benefit of machine learning over logistic regression for clinical prediction models. J Clin Epidemiol 2019;110:12–22 doi:10.1016/j.jclinepi.2019.02.004 pmid:30763612

    CrossRefPubMed
51. 51.↵
    1. Lee JG,
    2. Jun S,
    3. Cho YW, et al

    . Deep learning in medical imaging: general overview. Korean J Radiology 2017;18:570–84 doi:10.3348/kjr.2017.18.4.570 pmid:28670152

    CrossRefPubMed
52. 52.↵
    1. Retson TA,
    2. Besser AH,
    3. Sall S, et al

    . Machine learning and deep neural networks in thoracic and cardiovascular imaging. J Thorac Imaging 2019;34:192–201 doi:10.1097/RTI.0000000000000385 pmid:31009397

    CrossRefPubMed
53. 53.↵
    1. Morris MA,
    2. Saboury B,
    3. Burkett B, et al

    . Reinventing radiology: big data and the future of medical imaging. J Thorac Imaging 2018;33:4–16 doi:10.1097/RTI.0000000000000311 pmid:29252898

    CrossRefPubMed
54. 54.↵
    1. Hesamian MH,
    2. Jia W,
    3. He X, et al

    . Deep learning techniques for medical image segmentation: achievements and challenges. J Digit Imaging 2019;32:582–96 doi:10.1007/s10278-019-00227-x pmid:31144149

    CrossRefPubMed
55. 55.↵
    1. Kim DW,
    2. Jang HY,
    3. Kim KW, et al

    . Design characteristics of studies reporting the performance of artificial intelligence algorithms for diagnostic analysis of medical images: results from recently published papers. Korean J Radiol 2019;20:405–10 doi:10.3348/kjr.2019.0025 pmid:30799571

    CrossRefPubMed