
pmid: 37365065
B-lines are a ring-down artifact of lung ultrasound that arise with increased alveolar water in conditions such as pulmonary edema and infectious pneumonitis. Confluent B-line presence may signify a different level of pathology compared with single B-lines. Existing algorithms aimed at B-line counting do not distinguish between single and confluent B-lines. The objective of this study was to test a machine learning algorithm for confluent B-line identification.This study used a subset of 416 clips from 157 subjects, previously acquired in a prospective study enrolling adults with shortness of breath at two academic medical centers, using a hand-held tablet and a 14-zone protocol. After exclusions, random sampling generated a total of 416 clips (146 curvilinear, 150 sector and 120 linear) for review. A group of five experts in point-of-care ultrasound blindly evaluated the clips for presence/absence of confluent B-lines. Ground truth was defined as majority agreement among the experts and used for comparison with the algorithm.Confluent B-lines were present in 206 of 416 clips (49.5%). Sensitivity and specificity of confluent B-line detection by algorithm compared with expert determination were 83% (95% confidence interval [CI]: 0.77-0.88) and 92% (95% CI: 0.88-0.96). Sensitivity and specificity did not statistically differ between transducers. Agreement between algorithm and expert for confluent B-lines measured by unweighted κ was 0.75 (95% CI: 0.69-0.81) for the overall set.The confluent B-line detection algorithm had high sensitivity and specificity for detection of confluent B-lines in lung ultrasound point-of-care clips, compared with expert determination.
Adult, Machine Learning, Humans, Pulmonary Edema, Prospective Studies, Lung, Algorithms, Ultrasonography
Adult, Machine Learning, Humans, Pulmonary Edema, Prospective Studies, Lung, Algorithms, Ultrasonography
| selected citations These citations are derived from selected sources. This is an alternative to the "Influence" indicator, which also reflects the overall/total impact of an article in the research community at large, based on the underlying citation network (diachronically). | 11 | |
| popularity This indicator reflects the "current" impact/attention (the "hype") of an article in the research community at large, based on the underlying citation network. | Top 10% | |
| influence This indicator reflects the overall/total impact of an article in the research community at large, based on the underlying citation network (diachronically). | Average | |
| impulse This indicator reflects the initial momentum of an article directly after its publication, based on the underlying citation network. | Top 10% |
