Table 2.
Comparison between automated ML-derived measurements against expert reader’s reference values obtained using the conventional methodology, side by side with intra- and interobserver variability of the conventional methodology
| Conventional interpretation |
Automated ML interpretation vs conventional interpretation | ML-assisted interpretation interobserver variability | ||
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Intraobserver variability | Interobserver variability | |||
| IVS thickness, mm | 7 ± 5 | 11 ± 8 | 14 ± 10 | 0 ± 1* |
| LVPW thickness, mm | 8 ± 7 | 15 ± 13 | 17 ± 15 | 1 ± 3* |
| LVIDs, mm | 3 ± 2 | 8 ± 6 | 10 ± 10 | 3 ± 5* |
| LVIDd, mm | 2 ± 2 | 4 ± 4 | 6 ± 5 | 0 ± 1* |
| LVOT diameter, mm | 2 ± 3 | 4 ± 3 | 5 ± 4 | 6 ± 14 |
| LV EDV (A2C), mL | 10 ± 9 | 20 ± 13 | 14 ± 10 | 6 ± 8* |
| LV EDV (A4C), mL | 7 ± 5 | 22 ± 7 | 16 ± 8 | 4 ± 5* |
| LV ESV (A2C), mL | 11 ± 9 | 23 ± 14 | 27 ± 19 | 3 ± 4* |
| LV ESV (A4C), mL | 9 ± 7 | 32 ± 13 | 35 ± 16 | 4 ± 5* |
| LA Vol (A2C), mL | 14 ± 9 | 17 ± 22 | 14 ± 10 | 9 ± 9 |
| LA Vol (A4C), mL | 13 ± 13 | 18 ± 13 | 16 ± 8 | 9 ± 8* |
| LVOT VTI, cm | 5 ± 4 | 7 ± 5 | 8 ± 7 | 1 ± 4* |
| MV E Vel, cm/sec | 4 ± 4 | 8 ± 7 | 6 ± 5 | 3 ± 16 |
| MV A Vel, cm/sec | 3 ± 3 | 14 ± 11 | 14 ± 11 | 3 ± 16* |
| LV E’(l), cm/sec | 7 ± 9 | 10 ± 20 | 11 ± 17 | 2 ± 8 |
| LV E’(s), cm/sec | 4 ± 4 | 6 ± 8 | 8 ± 7 | 0 ± 0* |
Values represent absolute difference in percentage of the mean. Abbreviations are as in Table 1.
*
P < .05 for ML-assisted vs conventional interpretation.