The discipline of radiology and diagnostic imaging has evolved greatly in recent years. We have observed an exponential increase in the number of exams performed, subspecialization of medical fields, and increases in accuracy of the various imaging methods, making it a challenge for the radiologist to “know everything about all exams and regions”. In addition, imaging exams are no longer only qualitative and diagnostic, providing now quantitative information on disease severity, as well as identifying biomarkers of prognosis and treatment response. In view of this, computer-aided diagnosis systems have been developed with the objective of complementing diagnostic imaging and helping the therapeutic decision-making process. With the advent of artificial intelligence, “big data”, and machine learning, we are moving toward the rapid expansion of the use of these tools in daily life of physicians, making each patient unique, as well as leading radiology toward the concept of multidisciplinary approach and precision medicine. In this article, we will present the main aspects of the computational tools currently available for analysis of images and the principles of such analysis, together with the main terms and concepts involved, as well as examining the impact that the development of artificial intelligence has had on radiology and diagnostic imaging.

No abstract

Background: Currently, magnetic resonance imaging (MRI) is used to evaluate active inflammatory sacroiliitis related to axial spondyloarthritis (axSpA). The qualitative and semiquantitative diagnosis performed by expert radiologists and rheumatologists remains subject to significant intrapersonal and interpersonal variation. This encouraged us to use machine-learning methods for this task. Methods: In this retrospective study including 56 sacroiliac joint MRI exams, 24 patients had positive and 32 had negative findings for inflammatory sacroiliitis according to the ASAS group criteria. The dataset was randomly split with~80% (46 samples, 20 positive and 26 negative) as training and~20% as external test (10 samples, 4 positive and 6 negative). After manual segmentation of the images by a musculoskeletal radiologist, multiple features were extracted. The classifiers used were the Support Vector Machine, the Multilayer Perceptron (MLP), and the Instance-Based Algorithm, combined with the Relief and Wrapper methods for feature selection. Results: Based on 10-fold cross-validation using the training dataset, the MLP classifier obtained the best performance with sensitivity = 100%, specificity = 95.6% and accuracy = 84.7%, using 6 features selected by the Wrapper method. Using the test dataset (external validation) the same MLP classifier obtained sensitivity = 100%, specificity = 66.7% and accuracy = 80%. Conclusions: Our results show the potential of machine learning methods to identify SIJ subchondral bone marrow edema in axSpA patients and are promising to aid in the detection of active inflammatory sacroiliitis on MRI STIR sequences. Multilayer Perceptron (MLP) achieved the best results.

No abstract

No abstract