Çamalan, Seda

Importance Timely identification of aortic stenosis (AS) is essential for appropriate clinical management, yet screening remains limited by dependence on comprehensive echocardiography and trained imaging personnel. Objective To develop and validate a deep learning algorithm for detection of moderate or greater AS and prospectively evaluate its performance using artificial intelligence (AI)–guided focused cardiac ultrasound (FoCUS) acquired by novice operators. Design, Setting, and Participants This diagnostic study included retrospective algorithm development and validation and prospective evaluation of AI-guided FoCUS across Mayo Clinic sites in the Midwest, Arizona, and Florida. The model was developed using 6753 patients and evaluated in internal validation (n = 852), internal test (n = 844), and validation (n = 1912) cohorts. Performance was assessed on FoCUS acquired by experienced sonographers (n = 602) and prospectively by novice operators (n = 1302). The retrospective model development and validation cohorts comprised studies performed from January 2005 through September 2022. Prospective study was conducted in 2 enrollment periods from June to August 2024 and from June to September 2025. Participants from both periods were combined to comprise the final prospective cohort. Exposure AI-guided FoCUS acquisition and automated deep learning–based assessment for detection of moderate or greater AS. Main Outcomes and Measures Detection of moderate or greater AS. Performance was assessed using area under the receiver operating characteristic curve (AUROC), sensitivity, specificity, and positive predictive value. Results The model demonstrated excellent discrimination in the internal test cohort (AUROC, 0.99; 95% CI, 0.98-1.00) and geographically distinct validation cohorts in Arizona (AUROC, 0.99; 95% CI, 0.97-1.00) and Florida (AUROC, 0.99; 95% CI, 0.96-1.00). Among FoCUS examinations acquired by experienced sonographers, sensitivity was 95% (95% CI, 82-99) and specificity was 97% (95% CI, 95-98). In the prospective novice-operator cohort, 1258 of 1302 examinations (96.6%) were suitable for automated analysis. Sensitivity was 93% (95% CI, 82-99) and specificity was 96% (95% CI, 95-97). Expert review of AI-positive and uninterpretable examinations increased the positive predictive value from 49.4% to 91.1%, with sensitivity of 85.4%. Conclusions and Relevance A deep learning algorithm accurately detected moderate or greater AS across validation cohorts in this study. In prospective evaluation, novice operators were able to acquire AI-guided FoCUS examinations that enabled accurate detection of moderate or greater AS. These findings support a scalable strategy that may expand access to AS detection in settings with limited echocardiography resources.

AbstractObjectiveThis study investigated the comparative performance of ear, nose, and throat (ENT) physicians in correctly detecting ear abnormalities when reviewing digital otoscopy imaging using 3 different visualization methods, including computer‐assisted composite images called “SelectStitch,” single video frame “Still” images, and video clips. The study also explored clinicians' diagnostic confidence levels and the time to make a diagnosis.Study DesignClinician diagnostic reader study.SettingOnline diagnostic survey of ENT physicians.MethodsNine ENT physicians reviewed digital otoscopy examinations from 86 ears with various diagnoses (normal, perforation, retraction, middle ear effusion, tympanosclerosis). Otoscopy examinations used artificial‐intelligence (AI)‐based computer‐aided composite image generation from a video clip (SelectStitch), manually selected best still frame from a video clip (Still), or the entire video clip. Statistical analyses included comparisons of ability to detect correct diagnosis, confidence levels, and diagnosis times.ResultsThe ENT physicians' ability to detect ear abnormalities (33.2%‐68.7%) varied depending on the pathologies. SelectStitch and Still images were not statistically different in detecting abnormalities (P > .50), but both were different from Video (P < .01). However, the performance improvement observed with Videos came at the cost of significantly longer time to determining the diagnosis. The level of confidence in the diagnosis was positively associated with correct diagnoses, but varied by particular pathology.ConclusionThis study explores the potential of computer‐assisted techniques like SelectStitch in enhancing otoscopic diagnoses and time‐saving, which could benefit telemedicine settings. Comparable performance between computer‐generated and manually selected images suggests the potential of AI algorithms for otoscopy applications.