错误:搜索内容不能为空,请输入英文关键词
错误:关键词超出字数限制,请精简
高级检索

Diagnostic accuracy of chest X-ray and CT using artificial intelligence for osteoporosis: systematic review and meta-analysis

  • Norio Yamamoto,
  • Akihiro Shiroshita,
  • Ryota Kimura,
  • Tomohiko Kamo,
  • Hirofumi Ogihara,
  • Takahiro Tsuge

摘要

Introduction

Artificial intelligence (AI)-based systems using chest images are potentially reliable for diagnosing osteoporosis.

Methods

We performed a systematic review and meta-analysis to assess the diagnostic accuracy of chest X-ray and computed tomography (CT) scans using AI for osteoporosis in accordance with the diagnostic test accuracy guidelines. We included any type of study investigating the diagnostic accuracy of index test for osteoporosis. We searched MEDLINE, EMBASE, the Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials, and IEEE Xplore Digital Library on November 8, 2023. The main outcome measures were the sensitivity, specificity, and area under the receiver operating characteristic curve (AUC) for osteoporosis and osteopenia. We described forest plots for sensitivity, specificity, and AUC. The summary points were estimated from the bivariate random-effects models. We summarized the overall quality of evidence using the Grades of Recommendation, Assessment, Development, and Evaluation approach.

Results

Nine studies with 11,369 participants were included in this review. The pooled sensitivity, specificity, and AUC of chest X-rays for the diagnosis of osteoporosis were 0.83 (95% confidence interval [CI] 0.75, 0.89), 0.76 (95% CI 0.71, 0.80), and 0.86 (95% CI 0.83, 0.89), respectively (certainty of the evidence, low). The pooled sensitivity and specificity of chest CT for the diagnosis of osteoporosis and osteopenia were 0.83 (95% CI 0.69, 0.92) and 0.70 (95% CI 0.61, 0.77), respectively (certainty of the evidence, low and very low).

Conclusions

This review suggests that chest X-ray with AI has a high sensitivity for the diagnosis of osteoporosis, highlighting its potential for opportunistic screening. However, the risk of bias of patient selection in most studies were high. More research with adequate participants’ selection criteria for screening tool will be needed in the future.