Pith. sign in

REVIEW

Deep learning and traditional-based CAD schemes for the pulmonary embolism diagnosis: A survey

Not yet reviewed by Pith; the record is open.

This paper has not been read by Pith yet. Machine review is queued; the pith claim, tier, and objections will appear here once it completes.

SPECIMEN: schema-true, not a live event

T0 review · schema-true

One-sentence machine reading of the paper's core claim.

pith:XXXXXXXX · record.json · timestamp

arxiv 2312.01351 v1 pith:KZ7VFIGF submitted 2023-12-03 eess.IV cs.CV

Deep learning and traditional-based CAD schemes for the pulmonary embolism diagnosis: A survey

classification eess.IV cs.CV
keywords diagnosisarticlesdeeplearningpulmonaryresearchembolismevaluate
verification ladder T0 review T1 audit T2 compute T3 formal T4 reserved
0 comments
read the original abstract

Nowadays, pulmonary Computed Tomography Angiography (CTA) is the main tool for detecting Pulmonary Embolism (PE). However, manual interpretation of CTA volume requires a radiologist, which is time-consuming and error-prone due to the specific conditions of lung tissue, large volume of data, lack of experience, and eye fatigue. Therefore, Computer-Aided Design (CAD) systems are used as a second opinion for the diagnosis of PE. The purpose of this article is to review, evaluate, and compare the performance of deep learning and traditional-based CAD system for diagnosis PE and to help physicians and researchers in this field. In this study, all articles available in databases such as IEEE, ScienceDirect, Wiley, Springer, Nature, and Wolters Kluwer in the field of PE diagnosis were examined using traditional and deep learning methods. From 2002 to 2023, 23 papers were studied to extract the articles with the considered limitations. Each paper presents an automatic PE detection system that we evaluate using criteria such as sensitivity, False Positives (FP), and the number of datasets. This research work includes recent studies, state-of-the-art research works, and a more comprehensive overview compared to previously published review articles in this research area.

discussion (0)

Sign in with ORCID, Apple, or X to comment. Anyone can read and Pith papers without signing in.