Greason, Christie

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.

Abstract Aims Heart failure is prevalent; however, there is no cost-effective screening option. Against formal echocardiography, we assessed the diagnostic performance of focused cardiac ultrasound (FoCUS), performed by novice users guided and interpreted by artificial intelligence (AI) for the assessment of left ventricular ejection fraction (LVEF). Methods and results We prospectively enrolled 496 adults referred for diagnostic echocardiography. Novice operators (without clinical or imaging experience) underwent a 4-h imaging workshop, then performed FoCUS using a point-of-care device (Philips Lumify) utilizing real-time AI-image guidance (UltraSight). Images were assessed by AI-image interpretation software (Mayo Clinic), and two expert blinded echocardiologists. Median age was 67, 39% female, and body mass index range 17–56 kg/m2. Forty-one subjects (8.3%) exhibited moderate or greater LV dilatation and 28 (5.6%) had LVEF <40%. The median scan time was 4 min (IQR 3–5). Adequate views were achieved in 95.0% and 97.4% of subjects for AI interpretation and expert analysis, respectively. A two-step diagnostic screening process for low EF in which only abnormal AI reads or uninterpretable scans were reviewed by experts (15.1%) had a sensitivity 96.2%, specificity 95.4%, PPV 54.3%, and NPV 99.8%. A subsequent prospective validation study of 344 subjects demonstrated similar results (sensitivity 100%, specificity 99.4%). Conclusion In this early feasibility investigation, AI-guidance technology embedded on a handheld device, enabled novice users without clinical or imaging experience to acquire sufficient quality images to accurately assess LVEF with minimal training. The technology evaluated in this study may hold promise for AI-guidance and interpretation to facilitate low-cost screening for cardiac dysfunction.