The Diagnostic Accuracy of Artificial Intelligence in Radiological Markers of Normal-Pressure Hydrocephalus (NPH) on Non-Contrast CT Scans of the Brain
Issued Date
2023-09-01
Resource Type
eISSN
20754418
Scopus ID
2-s2.0-85170397698
Journal Title
Diagnostics
Volume
13
Issue
17
Rights Holder(s)
SCOPUS
Bibliographic Citation
Diagnostics Vol.13 No.17 (2023)
Suggested Citation
Songsaeng D., Nava-apisak P., Wongsripuemtet J., Kingchan S., Angkoondittaphong P., Phawaphutanon P., Supratak A. The Diagnostic Accuracy of Artificial Intelligence in Radiological Markers of Normal-Pressure Hydrocephalus (NPH) on Non-Contrast CT Scans of the Brain. Diagnostics Vol.13 No.17 (2023). doi:10.3390/diagnostics13172840 Retrieved from: https://repository.li.mahidol.ac.th/handle/20.500.14594/90234
Title
The Diagnostic Accuracy of Artificial Intelligence in Radiological Markers of Normal-Pressure Hydrocephalus (NPH) on Non-Contrast CT Scans of the Brain
Author's Affiliation
Other Contributor(s)
Abstract
Diagnosing normal-pressure hydrocephalus (NPH) via non-contrast computed tomography (CT) brain scans is presently a formidable task due to the lack of universally agreed-upon standards for radiographic parameter measurement. A variety of radiological parameters, such as Evans’ index, narrow sulci at high parietal convexity, Sylvian fissures’ dilation, focally enlarged sulci, and more, are currently measured by radiologists. This study aimed to enhance NPH diagnosis by comparing the accuracy, sensitivity, specificity, and predictive values of radiological parameters, as evaluated by radiologists and AI methods, utilizing cerebrospinal fluid volumetry. Results revealed a sensitivity of 77.14% for radiologists and 99.05% for AI, with specificities of 98.21% and 57.14%, respectively, in diagnosing NPH. Radiologists demonstrated NPV, PPV, and an accuracy of 82.09%, 97.59%, and 88.02%, while AI reported 98.46%, 68.42%, and 77.42%, respectively. ROC curves exhibited an area under the curve of 0.954 for radiologists and 0.784 for AI, signifying the diagnostic index for NPH. In conclusion, although radiologists exhibited superior sensitivity, specificity, and accuracy in diagnosing NPH, AI served as an effective initial screening mechanism for potential NPH cases, potentially easing the radiologists’ burden. Given the ongoing AI advancements, it is plausible that AI could eventually match or exceed radiologists’ diagnostic prowess in identifying hydrocephalus.