Identifying Patients with CSF-Venous Fistula Using Brain MRI: A Deep Learning Approach

References

1. 1.↵
   2. Cheema S,
   3. Anderson J,
   4. Angus-Leppan H, et al

   . Multidisciplinary consensus guideline for the diagnosis and management of spontaneous intracranial hypotension. J Neurol Neurosurg Psychiatry 2023;94:835–43 doi:10.1136/jnnp-2023-331166 pmid:37147116

   Abstract/FREE Full Text
2. 2.↵
   2. Severson M,
   3. Schaurich CG,
   4. Strecker-McGraw MK

   . Cerebrospinal Fluid Leak. StatPearls Publishing 2023.
3. 3.↵
   2. Brinjikji W,
   3. Garza I,
   4. Whealy M, et al

   . Clinical and imaging outcomes of cerebrospinal fluid-venous fistula embolization. J Neurointerv Surg 2022;14:953–56 doi:10.1136/neurintsurg-2021-018466 pmid:35074899

   Abstract/FREE Full Text
4. 4.↵
   2. Callen AL,
   3. Timpone VM,
   4. Schwertner A, et al

   . Algorithmic multimodality approach to diagnosis and treatment of spinal CSF leak and venous fistula in patients with spontaneous intracranial hypotension. AJR Am J Roentgenol 2022;219:292–301 doi:10.2214/AJR.22.27485 pmid:35261281

   CrossRefPubMed
5. 5.↵
   2. Benson JC,
   3. Madhavan AA,
   4. Cutsforth-Gregory JK, et al

   . The Monro-Kellie doctrine: A review and call for revision. AJNR Am J Neuroradiol 2023;44:2–6 doi:10.3174/ajnr.A7721

   Abstract/FREE Full Text
6. 6.↵
   2. Dobrocky T,
   3. Grunder L,
   4. Breiding PS, et al

   . Assessing spinal cerebrospinal fluid leaks in spontaneous intracranial hypotension with a scoring system based on brain magnetic resonance imaging findings. JAMA Neurol 2019;76:580–87 doi:10.1001/jamaneurol.2018.4921 pmid:30776059

   CrossRefPubMed
7. 7.↵
   2. D'Antona L,
   3. Jaime Merchan MA,
   4. Vassiliou A, et al

   . Clinical presentation, investigation findings, and treatment outcomes of spontaneous intracranial hypotension syndrome: A systematic review and meta-analysis. JAMA Neurol 2021;78:329–37 doi:10.1001/jamaneurol.2020.4799 pmid:33393980

   CrossRefPubMed
8. 8.↵
   2. Kim DK,
   3. Brinjikji W,
   4. Morris PP, et al

   . Lateral decubitus digital subtraction myelography: Tips, tricks, and pitfalls. AJNR Am J Neuroradiol 2020;41:21–28 doi:10.3174/ajnr.A6368 pmid:31857327

   Abstract/FREE Full Text
9. 9.↵
   2. Rouzrokh P,
   3. Khosravi B,
   4. Faghani S, et al

   . Mitigating bias in radiology machine learning: 1. Data Handling. Radiology Artif Intell 2022;4:e210290

   CrossRef
10. 10.↵
    2. Singh Y,
    3. Kelm ZS,
    4. Faghani S, et al

    . Deep learning approach for differentiating indeterminate adrenal masses using CT imaging. Abdom Radiology (NY) 2023;48:3189–94 doi:10.1007/s00261-023-03988-w pmid:37369921

    CrossRefPubMed
11. 11.↵
    2. Zhang K,
    3. Khosravi B,
    4. Vahdati S, et al

    . Mitigating bias in radiology machine learning: 2. Model Development. Radiology Artif Intell 2022;4:e220010

    CrossRef
12. 12.↵
    2. Moassefi M,
    3. Faghani S,
    4. Conte GM, et al

    . A deep learning model for discriminating true progression from pseudoprogression in glioblastoma patients. J Neurooncol 2022;159:447–55 doi:10.1007/s11060-022-04080-x pmid:35852738

    CrossRefPubMed
13. 13.↵
    2. Faghani S,
    3. Khosravi B,
    4. Moassefi M, et al

    . A comparison of three different deep learning-based models to predict the MGMT promoter methylation status in glioblastoma using brain MRI. J Digit Imaging 2023;36:837–46 doi:10.1007/s10278-022-00757-x pmid:36604366

    CrossRefPubMed
14. 14.↵
    2. Huang G,
    3. Liu Z,
    4. Van Der Maaten L, et al

    . Densely connected convolutional networks. 2017 IEEE Conference on Computer Vision and Pattern Recognition (CVPR). 2017. p. 2261–69 doi:10.1109/CVPR.2017.243

    CrossRef
15. 15.↵
    2. Loshchilov I,
    3. Hutter F

    . Decoupled weight decay regularization. arXiv [cs.LG]. 2017. http://arxiv.org/abs/1711.05101
16. 16.↵
    2. Gotmare A,
    3. Keskar NS,
    4. Xiong C, et al

    . A closer look at deep learning heuristics: learning rate restarts, warmup and distillation. arXiv [cs.LG]. 2018. http://arxiv.org/abs/1810.13243
17. 17.↵
    2. Ho Y,
    3. Wookey S

    . The real-world-weight cross-entropy loss function: Modeling the costs of mislabeling. arXiv [cs.LG]. 2020. http://arxiv.org/abs/2001.00570
18. 18.↵
    2. Faghani S,
    3. Khosravi B,
    4. Zhang K, et al

    . Mitigating bias in radiology machine learning: 3. Performance Metrics. Radiology Artif Intell 2022;4:e220061 doi:10.1148/ryai.220061 pmid:36204539

    CrossRefPubMed
19. 19.↵
    2. Moassefi M,
    3. Faghani S,
    4. Khosravi B, et al

    . Artificial intelligence in radiology: Overview of application types, design, and challenges. Semin Roentgenol 2023;58:170–77 doi:10.1053/j.ro.2023.01.005 pmid:37087137

    CrossRefPubMed
20. 20.↵
    2. Fu J,
    3. Chai J-W,
    4. Chen P-L, et al

    . Quantitative measurement of spinal cerebrospinal fluid by cascade artificial intelligence models in patients with spontaneous intracranial hypotension. Biomedicines 2022;10 doi:10.3390/biomedicines10082049 pmid:36009595

    CrossRefPubMed
21. 21.↵
    2. Arnold PG,
    3. Kaya E,
    4. Reisert M, et al

    . Support vector machine-based spontaneous intracranial hypotension detection on brain MRI. Clin Neuroradiol 2022;32:225–30 doi:10.1007/s00062-021-01099-x pmid:34665277

    CrossRefPubMed
22. 22.↵
    2. Houk JL,
    3. Morrison S,
    4. Peskoe S, et al

    . Validity of the Bern score as a surrogate marker of clinical severity in patients with spontaneous intracranial hypotension. AJNR Am J Neuroradiol 2023;44:1096–100 doi:10.3174/ajnr.A7962 pmid:37562827

    Abstract/FREE Full Text
23. 23.↵
    2. Steyaert S,
    3. Pizurica M,
    4. Nagaraj D, et al

    . Multimodal data fusion for cancer biomarker discovery with deep learning. Nat Mach Intell 2023;5:351–62 doi:10.1038/s42256-023-00633-5 pmid:37693852

    CrossRefPubMed
24. 24.↵
    2. Couture HD

    . Deep learning-based prediction of molecular tumor biomarkers from H&E: A practical review. J Pers Med 2022;12 doi:10.3390/jpm12122022 pmid:36556243

    CrossRefPubMed