Improved accuracy of myocardial perfusion SPECT for detection of coronary artery disease by machine learning in a large population

Abstract

ObjectiveWe aimed to improve the diagnostic accuracy of myocardial perfusion SPECT (MPS) by integrating clinical data and quantitative image features with machine learning (ML) algorithms. Methods1,181 rest 201Tl/stress 99mTc-sestamibi dual-isotope MPS studies [713 consecutive cases with correlating invasive coronary angiography (ICA) and suspected coronary artery disease (CAD) and 468 with low likelihood (LLk) of CAD <5%] were considered. Cases with stenosis <70% by ICA and LLk of CAD were considered normal. Total stress perfusion deficit (TPD) for supine/prone data, stress/rest perfusion change, and transient ischemic dilatation were derived by automated perfusion quantification software and were combined with age, sex, and post-electrocardiogram CAD probability by a boosted ensemble ML algorithm (LogitBoost). The diagnostic accuracy of the model for prediction of obstructive CAD ≥70% was compared to standard prone/supine quantification and to visual analysis by two experienced readers utilizing all imaging, quantitative, and clinical data. Tenfold stratified cross-validation was performed. ResultsThe diagnostic accuracy of ML (87.3% ± 2.1%) was similar to Expert 1 (86.0% ± 2.1%), but superior to combined supine/prone TPD (82.8% ± 2.2%) and Expert 2 (82.1% ± 2.2%) (P < .01). The receiver operator characteristic areas under curve for ML algorithm (0.94 ± 0.01) were higher than those for TPD and both visual readers (P < .001). The sensitivity of ML algorithm (78.9% ± 4.2%) was similar to TPD (75.6% ± 4.4%) and Expert 1 (76.3% ± 4.3%), but higher than that of Expert 2 (71.1% ± 4.6%), (P < .01). The specificity of ML algorithm (92.1% ± 2.2%) was similar to Expert 1 (91.4% ± 2.2%) and Expert 2 (88.3% ± 2.5%), but higher than TPD (86.8% ± 2.6%), (P < .01). ConclusionML significantly improves diagnostic performance of MPS by computational integration of quantitative perfusion and clinical data to the level rivaling expert analysis.