Background

Bone age (BA) assessment performed by artificial intelligence (AI) is of growing interest due to improved accuracy, precision and time efficiency in daily routine. The aim of this study was to investigate the accuracy and efficiency of a novel AI software version for automated BA assessment in comparison to the Greulich-Pyle method.

Methods

Radiographs of 514 patients were analysed in this retrospective study. Total BA was assessed independently by three blinded radiologists applying the GP method and by the AI software. Overall and gender-specific BA assessment results, as well as reading times of both approaches, were compared, while the reference BA was defined by two blinded experienced paediatric radiologists in consensus by application of the Greulich-Pyle method.

Results

Mean absolute deviation (MAD) and root mean square deviation (RSMD) were significantly lower between AI-derived BA and reference BA (MAD 0.34 years, RSMD 0.38 years) than between reader-calculated BA and reference BA (MAD 0.79 years, RSMD 0.89 years; p < 0.001). The correlation between AI-derived BA and reference BA (r = 0.99) was significantly higher than between reader-calculated BA and reference BA (r = 0.90; p < 0.001). No statistical difference was found in reader agreement and correlation analyses regarding gender (p = 0.241). Mean reading times were reduced by 87% using the AI system.

Conclusions

A novel AI software enabled highly accurate automated BA assessment. It may improve efficiency in clinical routine by reducing reading times without compromising the accuracy compared with the Greulich-Pyle method.

中文翻译：

---

骨龄评估中的人工智能：与Greulich-Pyle方法相比，新型全自动算法的准确性和效率。

背景

人工智能（AI）进行的骨龄（BA）评估日益受到人们的关注，原因是其日常工作的准确性，准确性和时间效率得到了提高。这项研究的目的是与Greulich-Pyle方法相比，研究用于自动BA评估的新型AI软件版本的准确性和效率。

方法

这项回顾性研究分析了514例患者的X光片。由三位不知情的放射科医生应用GP方法和AI软件独立评估了总BA。比较了总体和针对性别的BA评估结果以及两种方法的阅读时间，而参考盲法由两名盲人经验丰富的儿科放射科医生通过应用Greulich-Pyle方法达成共识。

结果

AI衍生的BA和参考BA之间的平均绝对偏差（MAD）和均方根偏差（RSMD）显着低于阅读器计算的BA和参考BA之间的平均偏差（MAD 0.34年，RSMD 0.38年）（MAD 0.79年，RSMD 0.89）年；p  <0.001）。AI衍生的BA与参考BA之间的相关性（r  = 0.99）显着高于读者计算的BA与参考BA之间的相关性（r  = 0.90; p  <0.001）。在有关性别的读者一致性和相关性分析中未发现统计学差异（p =  0.241）。使用AI系统，平均阅读时间减少了87％。

结论

新颖的AI软件可实现高度准确的自动化BA评估。与Greulich-Pyle方法相比，它可以通过减少阅读时间而不降低准确性来提高临床常规效率。