nach oben

Die Gynäkologie

Erschienen in:

13.09.2022 | Kolposkopie | Leitthema

Aktuelle Aspekte zur künstlichen Intelligenz in der gynäkologischen Diagnostik

verfasst von: Dr. Jann Lennard Scharf, Christoph Dracopoulos, Michael Gembicki, Amrei Welp, Jan Weichert

Erschienen in: Die Gynäkologie | Ausgabe 10/2022

Einloggen, um Zugang zu erhalten

Zusammenfassung

Anwendungen der künstlichen Intelligenz (KI) haben in der Medizin rapide zugenommen. Im Gegensatz zur Geburtshilfe und der Pränataldiagnostik findet die KI in der Gynäkologie bisher keine Anwendung in der klinischen Praxis. Dabei kann die KI die präoperative Differenzierung zwischen benignen und malignen Ovarialläsionen oder die Diagnose einer Endometriose erleichtern und die Differenzierung zwischen Leiomyomen und Leiomyosarkomen oder die Einteilung von Müller-Gang-Anomalien unterstützen. In der gynäkologischen Onkologie hat die KI durch die Verbesserung der Erkennung von Gebärmutterhalskrebs, der Bildgebung bei Eierstockkrebs und der Diagnose von Gebärmutterkrebs enorme Fortschritte erreicht. Der Übersichtsartikel beleuchtet aktuelle Aspekte der KI-Algorithmen in der gynäkologischen Diagnostik.

Ahn KH, Lee K‑S (2022) Artificial intelligence in obstetrics. Obstet Gynecol Sci 65:113–124. https://doi.org/10.5468/ogs.21234CrossRefPubMed

Akazawa M, Hashimoto K (2020) Artificial intelligence in ovarian cancer diagnosis. Anticancer Res 40:4795–4800. https://doi.org/10.21873/anticanres.14482CrossRefPubMed

Akazawa M, Hashimoto K (2021) Artificial intelligence in gynecologic cancers: current status and future challenges—a systematic review. Artif Intell Med 120:102164. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.artmed.2021.102164CrossRefPubMed

Aramendía-Vidaurreta V, Cabeza R, Villanueva A et al (2016) Ultrasound image discrimination between benign and malignant adnexal masses based on a neural network approach. Ultrasound Med Biol 42:742–752. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ultrasmedbio.2015.11.014CrossRefPubMed

Bao H, Bi H, Zhang X et al (2020) Artificial intelligence-assisted cytology for detection of cervical intraepithelial neoplasia or invasive cancer: a multicenter, clinical-based, observational study. Gynecol Oncol 159:171–178. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ygyno.2020.07.099CrossRefPubMed

Bendifallah S, Puchar A, Suisse S et al (2022) Machine learning algorithms as new screening approach for patients with endometriosis. Sci Rep 12:639. https://doi.org/10.1038/s41598-021-04637-2CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentral

Bentaleb J, Larouche M (2020) Innovative use of artificial intelligence in urogynecology. Int Urogynecol J 31:1287–1288. https://doi.org/10.1007/s00192-020-04243-2CrossRefPubMed

Bi WL, Hosny A, Schabath MB et al (2019) Artificial intelligence in cancer imaging: clinical challenges and applications. CA A Cancer J Clin. https://doi.org/10.3322/caac.21552CrossRef

Biswas N, Chakrabarti S (2020) Artificial intelligence (AI)-based systems biology approaches in multi-omics data analysis of cancer. Front Oncol 10:588221. https://doi.org/10.3389/fonc.2020.588221CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentral

10.

Bodalal Z, Trebeschi S, Nguyen-Kim TDL et al (2019) Radiogenomics: bridging imaging and genomics. Abdom Radiol 44:1960–1984. https://doi.org/10.1007/s00261-019-02028-wCrossRef

11.

van Calster B IOTA—ADNEX model. https://www.iotagroup.org/sites/default/files/adnexmodel/IOTA%20-%20ADNEX%20model.html. Zugegriffen: 16. März 2022

12.

Cesario A, D’Oria M, Calvani R et al (2021) The role of artificial intelligence in managing multimorbidity and cancer. J Pers Med 11:314. https://doi.org/10.3390/jpm11040314CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentral

13.

Chen X, Wang Y, Shen M et al (2020) Deep learning for the determination of myometrial invasion depth and automatic lesion identification in endometrial cancer MR imaging: a preliminary study in a single institution. Eur Radiol 30:4985–4994. https://doi.org/10.1007/s00330-020-06870-1CrossRefPubMed

14.

Chen Z, Liu Z, Du M, Wang Z (2021) Artificial intelligence in obstetric ultrasound: an update and future applications. Front Med 8:733468. https://doi.org/10.3389/fmed.2021.733468CrossRef

15.

Chiappa V, Bogani G, Interlenghi M et al (2021) The adoption of radiomics and machine learning improves the diagnostic processes of women with ovarian masses (the AROMA pilot study). J Ultrasound 24:429–437. https://doi.org/10.1007/s40477-020-00503-5CrossRefPubMed

16.

Christiansen F, Epstein EL, Smedberg E et al (2021) Ultrasound image analysis using deep neural networks for discriminating between benign and malignant ovarian tumors: comparison with expert subjective assessment. Ultrasound Obstet Gynecol 57:155–163. https://doi.org/10.1002/uog.23530CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentral

17.

Cohen PA, Jhingran A, Oaknin A, Denny L (2019) Cervical cancer. Lancet 393:169–182. https://doi.org/10.1016/S0140-6736(18)32470-XCrossRefPubMed

18.

D’Adamo GL, Widdop JT, Giles EM (2021) The future is now? Clinical and translational aspects of „Omics“ technologies. Immunol Cell Biol 99:168–176. https://doi.org/10.1111/imcb.12404CrossRefPubMed

19.

Delanerolle G, Yang X, Shetty S et al (2021) Artificial intelligence: a rapid case for advancement in the personalization of gynaecology/obstetric and mental health care. Womens Health (Lond Engl) 17:174550652110181. https://doi.org/10.1177/17455065211018111CrossRef

20.

Dong H‑C, Dong H‑K, Yu M‑H et al (2020) Using deep learning with convolutional neural network approach to identify the invasion depth of endometrial cancer in myometrium using MR images: a pilot study. Int J Environ Res Public Health 17:5993. https://doi.org/10.3390/ijerph17165993CrossRefPubMedCentral

21.

Drukker L, Noble JA, Papageorghiou AT (2020) Introduction to artificial intelligence in ultrasound imaging in obstetrics and gynecology. Ultrasound Obstet Gynecol 56:498–505. https://doi.org/10.1002/uog.22122CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentral

22.

Ertel W (2016) Grundkurs Künstliche Intelligenz https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-658-13549-2CrossRef

23.

Gartner Gartner Hype Cycle: Wie man Technologie-Hype interpretiert. https://www.gartner.de/de/methoden/hype-cycle. Zugegriffen: 15. März 2022

24.

Grigore M, Popovici RM, Gafitanu D et al (2020) Logistic models and artificial intelligence in the sonographic assessment of adnexal masses—a systematic review of the literature. Med Ultrason 22:469. https://doi.org/10.11152/mu-2538CrossRefPubMed

25.

Guerriero S, Pascual M, Ajossa S et al (2021) Artificial intelligence (AI) in the detection of rectosigmoid deep endometriosis. Eur J Obstet Gynecol Reprod Biol 261:29–33. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ejogrb.2021.04.012CrossRefPubMed

26.

Heinonen PK (2016) Distribution of female genital tract anomalies in two classifications. Eur J Obstet Gynecol Reprod Biol 206:141–146. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ejogrb.2016.09.009CrossRefPubMed

27.

Hodneland E, Dybvik JA, Wagner-Larsen KS et al (2021) Automated segmentation of endometrial cancer on MR images using deep learning. Sci Rep 11:179. https://doi.org/10.1038/s41598-020-80068-9CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentral

28.

Holmström O, Linder N, Kaingu H et al (2021) Point-of-care digital cytology with artificial intelligence for cervical cancer screening in a resource-limited setting. JAMA Netw Open 4:e211740. https://doi.org/10.1001/jamanetworkopen.2021.1740CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentral

29.

Hu L, Bell D, Antani S et al (2019) An observational study of deep learning and automated evaluation of cervical images for cancer screening. J Natl Cancer Inst 111:923–932. https://doi.org/10.1093/jnci/djy225CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentral

30.

Huang X, Wang Z, Zhang M, Luo H (2021) Diagnostic accuracy of the ADNEX model for ovarian cancer at the 15 % cut-off value: a systematic review and meta-analysis. Front Oncol 11:684257. https://doi.org/10.3389/fonc.2021.684257CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentral

31.

Hudelist G, Fritzer N, Staettner S et al (2013) Uterine sliding sign: a simple sonographic predictor for presence of deep infiltrating endometriosis of the rectum: sonographic demonstration of uterorectal adhesions. Ultrasound Obstet Gynecol 41:692–695. https://doi.org/10.1002/uog.12431CrossRefPubMed

32.

Iftikhar PM, Kuijpers MV, Khayyat A et al (2020) Artificial intelligence: a new paradigm in obstetrics and gynecology research and clinical practice. Cureus. https://doi.org/10.7759/cureus.7124CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentral

33.

Ito Y, Miyoshi A, Ueda Y et al (2021) An artificial intelligence-assisted diagnostic system improves the accuracy of image diagnosis of uterine cervical lesions. Mol Clin Oncol 16:27. https://doi.org/10.3892/mco.2021.2460CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentral

34.

Jacobs I, Oram D, Fairbanks J et al (1990) A risk of malignancy index incorporating CA 125, ultrasound and menopausal status for the accurate preoperative diagnosis of ovarian cancer. Br J Obstet Gynaecol 97:922–929. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1471-0528.1990.tb02448.xCrossRefPubMed

35.

Jeong SY, Park BK, Lee YY, Kim T‑J (2020) Validation of IOTA-ADNEX model in discriminating characteristics of adnexal masses: a comparison with subjective assessment. J Clin Med 9:2010. https://doi.org/10.3390/jcm9062010CrossRefPubMedCentral

36.

Kim SI, Chung JY, Paik H et al (2021) Prognostic role of computed tomography-based, artificial intelligence-driven waist skeletal muscle volume in uterine endometrial carcinoma. Insights Imaging 12:192. https://doi.org/10.1186/s13244-021-01134-yCrossRefPubMedPubMedCentral

37.

Kotarska M, Smoleń A, Stachowicz N, Kotarski J (2011) Application of neuron networks in the diagnostics of endometrial pathologies. Ginekol Pol 82(5):344–349

38.

Kudva V, Prasad K, Guruvare S (2020) Hybrid transfer learning for classification of uterine cervix images for cervical cancer screening. J Digit Imaging 33:619–631. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10278-019-00269-1CrossRefPubMed

39.

Lambin P, Leijenaar RTH, Deist TM et al (2017) Radiomics: the bridge between medical imaging and personalized medicine. Nat Rev Clin Oncol 14:749–762. https://doi.org/10.1038/nrclinonc.2017.141CrossRefPubMed

40.

Lecointre L, Dana J, Lodi M et al (2021) Artificial intelligence-based radiomics models in endometrial cancer: a systematic review. Eur J Surg Oncol 47:2734–2741. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ejso.2021.06.023CrossRefPubMed

41.

Li Y, Jian J, Pickhardt PJ et al (2020) MRI-based machine learning for differentiating borderline from malignant epithelial ovarian tumors: a multicenter study. J Magn Reson Imaging 52:897–904. https://doi.org/10.1002/jmri.27084CrossRefPubMed

42.

Liu X, Faes L, Kale AU et al (2019) A comparison of deep learning performance against health-care professionals in detecting diseases from medical imaging: a systematic review and meta-analysis. Lancet Digit Health 1:e271–e297. https://doi.org/10.1016/S2589-7500(19)30123-2CrossRefPubMed

43.

Maicas G, Leonardi M, Avery J et al (2021) Deep learning to diagnose pouch of Douglas obliteration with ultrasound sliding sign. Reprod Fertil 2:236–243. https://doi.org/10.1530/RAF-21-0031CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentral

44.

Makker V, MacKay H, Ray-Coquard I et al (2021) Endometrial cancer. Nat Rev Dis Primers 7:88. https://doi.org/10.1038/s41572-021-00324-8CrossRefPubMed

45.

Makris G‑M, Pouliakis A, Siristatidis C et al (2017) Image analysis and multi-layer perceptron artificial neural networks for the discrimination between benign and malignant endometrial lesions: artificial neural networks for endometrial cytology. Diagn Cytopathol 45:202–211. https://doi.org/10.1002/dc.23649CrossRefPubMed

46.

Malek M, Gity M, Alidoosti A et al (2019) A machine learning approach for distinguishing uterine sarcoma from leiomyomas based on perfusion weighted MRI parameters. Eur J Radiol 110:203–211. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ejrad.2018.11.009CrossRefPubMed

47.

Martínez-Más J, Bueno-Crespo A, Khazendar S et al (2019) Evaluation of machine learning methods with Fourier transform features for classifying ovarian tumors based on ultrasound images. PLoS ONE 14:e219388. https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0219388CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentral

48.

Matsuoka R (2021) Artificial intelligence and obstetric ultrasound. Donald School J Ultrasound Obstet Gynecol 15:218–222. https://doi.org/10.5005/jp-journals-10009-1702CrossRef

49.

Menezes LJ, Vazquez L, Mohan CK, Somboonwit C (2019) Eliminating cervical cancer: a role for artificial intelligence. In: Shapshak P, Balaji S, Kangueane P et al (Hrsg) Global virology III: virology in the 21st century. Springer, Cham, S 405–422CrossRef

50.

Miyagi Y, Takehara K, Nagayasu Y, Miyake T (2019) Application of deep learning to the classification of uterine cervical squamous epithelial lesion from colposcopy images combined with HPV types. Oncol Lett. https://doi.org/10.3892/ol.2019.11214CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentral

51.

Mysona DP, Kapp DS, Rohatgi A et al (2021) Applying artificial intelligence to gynecologic oncology: a review. Obstet Gynecol Surv 76:292–301. https://doi.org/10.1097/OGX.0000000000000902CrossRefPubMed

52.

Nakagawa M, Nakaura T, Namimoto T et al (2019) A multiparametric MRI-based machine learning to distinguish between uterine sarcoma and benign leiomyoma: comparison with 18F-FDG PET/CT. Clin Radiol 74:167.e1–167.e7. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.crad.2018.10.010CrossRef

53.

Nisenblat V, Bossuyt PM, Farquhar C et al (2016) Imaging modalities for the non-invasive diagnosis of endometriosis. Cochrane Database Syst Rev. https://doi.org/10.1002/14651858.CD009591.pub2CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentral

54.

Noort F, Vaart CH, Grob ATM et al (2019) Deep learning enables automatic quantitative assessment of puborectalis muscle and urogenital hiatus in plane of minimal hiatal dimensions. Ultrasound Obstet Gynecol 54:270–275. https://doi.org/10.1002/uog.20181CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentral

55.

Ongena YP, Yakar D, Haan M, Kwee TC (2021) Artificial intelligence in screening mammography: a population survey of women’s preferences. J Am Coll Radiol 18:79–86. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jacr.2020.09.042CrossRefPubMed

56.

Oosterhoff JHF, Doornberg JN, Machine Learning Consortium (2020) Artificial intelligence in orthopaedics: false hope or not? A narrative review along the line of Gartner’s hype cycle. EFORT Open Rev 5:593–603. https://doi.org/10.1302/2058-5241.5.190092CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentral

57.

Pergialiotis V, Pouliakis A, Parthenis C et al (2018) The utility of artificial neural networks and classification and regression trees for the prediction of endometrial cancer in postmenopausal women. Public Health 164:1–6. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.puhe.2018.07.012CrossRefPubMed

58.

Pouliakis A, Margari C, Margari N et al (2014) Using classification and regression trees, liquid-based cytology and nuclear morphometry for the discrimination of endometrial lesions: cart for endometrial lesion classification. Diagn Cytopathol 42:582–591. https://doi.org/10.1002/dc.23077CrossRefPubMed

59.

Ravegnini G, Ferioli M, Morganti AG et al (2021) Radiomics and artificial intelligence in uterine sarcomas: a systematic review. J Pers Med 11:1179. https://doi.org/10.3390/jpm11111179CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentral

60.

Sanyal P, Ganguli P, Barui S (2020) Performance characteristics of an artificial intelligence based on convolutional neural network for screening conventional Papanicolaou-stained cervical smears. Med J Armed Forces India 76:418–424. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.mjafi.2019.08.001CrossRefPubMed

61.

Sato M, Horie K, Hara A et al (2018) Application of deep learning to the classification of images from colposcopy. Oncol Lett. https://doi.org/10.3892/ol.2018.7762CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentral

62.

Shanthi PB, Faruqi F, Hareesha KS, Kudva R (2019) Deep convolution neural network for malignancy detection and classification in microscopic uterine cervix cell images. Asian Pac J Cancer Prev 20:3447–3456. https://doi.org/10.31557/APJCP.2019.20.11.3447CrossRef

63.

Sone K, Toyohara Y, Taguchi A et al (2021) Application of artificial intelligence in gynecologic malignancies: a review. J Obstet Gynaecol Res 47:2577–2585. https://doi.org/10.1111/jog.14818CrossRefPubMed

64.

Stanzione A, Cuocolo R, Del Grosso R et al (2021) Deep myometrial infiltration of endometrial cancer on MRI: a radiomics-powered machine learning pilot study. Acad Radiol 28:737–744. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.acra.2020.02.028CrossRefPubMed

65.

Stein EB, Roseland ME, Shampain KL et al (2021) Contemporary guidelines for adnexal mass imaging: a 2020 update. Abdom Radiol 46:2127–2139. https://doi.org/10.1007/s00261-020-02812-zCrossRef

66.

Sun S, Bonaffini PA, Nougaret S et al (2019) How to differentiate uterine leiomyosarcoma from leiomyoma with imaging. Diagn Interv Imaging 100:619–634. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.diii.2019.07.007CrossRefPubMed

67.

Takahashi Y, Sone K, Noda K et al (2021) Automated system for diagnosing endometrial cancer by adopting deep-learning technology in hysteroscopy. PLoS ONE 16:e248526. https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0248526CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentral

68.

Timmerman D, Testa AC, Bourne T et al (2008) Simple ultrasound-based rules for the diagnosis of ovarian cancer. Ultrasound Obstet Gynecol 31:681–690. https://doi.org/10.1002/uog.5365CrossRefPubMed

69.

Timmerman D, Verrelst H, Bourne TH et al (1999) Artificial neural network models for the preoperative discrimination between malignant and benign adnexal masses: artificial neural networks. Ultrasound Obstet Gynecol 13:17–25. https://doi.org/10.1046/j.1469-0705.1999.13010017.xCrossRefPubMed

70.

Timor-Tritsch IE, Monteagudo A, Ramos J et al (2021) Three-dimensional coronal plane of the uterus: a critical view for diagnostic accuracy. J Ultrasound Med 40:607–619. https://doi.org/10.1002/jum.15432CrossRefPubMed

71.

Török P, Harangi B (2018) Digital image analysis with fully connected convolutional neural network to facilitate hysteroscopic fibroid resection. Gynecol Obstet Invest 83:615–619. https://doi.org/10.1159/000490563CrossRefPubMed

72.

Urushibara A, Saida T, Mori K et al (2021) Diagnosing uterine cervical cancer on a single T2-weighted image: comparison between deep learning versus radiologists. Eur J Radiol 135:109471. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ejrad.2020.109471CrossRefPubMed

73.

Vailati-Riboni M, Palombo V, Loor JJ (2017) What are omics sciences? In: Ametaj BN (Hrsg) Periparturient diseases of dairy cows. Springer, Cham, S 1–7

74.

Van Calster B, Van Hoorde K, Valentin L et al (2014) Evaluating the risk of ovarian cancer before surgery using the ADNEX model to differentiate between benign, borderline, early and advanced stage invasive, and secondary metastatic tumours: prospective multicentre diagnostic study. BMJ 349:g5920. https://doi.org/10.1136/bmj.g5920CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentral

75.

Visalaxi S, Muthu T (2021) Automated prediction of endometriosis using deep learning. Int J Nonlinear Anal Appl. https://doi.org/10.22075/ijnaa.2021.5383CrossRef

76.

Vlachokosta AA, Asvestas PA, Gkrozou F et al (2013) Classification of hysteroscopical images using texture and vessel descriptors. Med Biol Eng Comput 51:859–867. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11517-013-1058-1CrossRefPubMed

77.

Wang C‑W, Liou Y‑A, Lin Y‑J et al (2021) Artificial intelligence-assisted fast screening cervical high grade squamous intraepithelial lesion and squamous cell carcinoma diagnosis and treatment planning. Sci Rep 11:16244. https://doi.org/10.1038/s41598-021-95545-yCrossRefPubMedPubMedCentral

78.

Wang R, Cai Y, Lee IK et al (2021) Evaluation of a convolutional neural network for ovarian tumor differentiation based on magnetic resonance imaging. Eur Radiol 31:4960–4971. https://doi.org/10.1007/s00330-020-07266-xCrossRefPubMed

79.

Weichert J, Rody A, Gembicki M (2020) Zukünftige Bildanalyse mit Hilfe automatisierter Algorithmen. Gynäkologe 53:166–175. https://doi.org/10.1007/s00129-020-04563-wCrossRef

80.

Weichert J, Welp A, Scharf JL et al (2021) The use of artificial intelligence in automation in the fields of gynaecology and obstetrics—an assessment of the state of play. Geburtshilfe Frauenheilkd 81:1203–1216. https://doi.org/10.1055/a-1522-3029CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentral

81.

Weichert J, Welp A, Scharf JL et al (2021) Künstliche Intelligenz in der pränatalen kardialen Diagnostik. Gynäkologe. https://doi.org/10.1007/s00129-021-04890-6CrossRef

82.

William W, Ware A, Basaza-Ejiri AH, Obungoloch J (2018) A review of image analysis and machine learning techniques for automated cervical cancer screening from pap-smear images. Comput Methods Programs Biomed 164:15–22. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.cmpb.2018.05.034CrossRefPubMed

83.

Wu M, Yan C, Liu H, Liu Q (2018) Automatic classification of ovarian cancer types from cytological images using deep convolutional neural networks. Biosci Rep 38:BSR20180289. https://doi.org/10.1042/BSR20180289CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentral

84.

Xu X, Li H, Wang S et al (2019) Multiplanar MRI-based predictive model for preoperative assessment of lymph node metastasis in endometrial cancer. Front Oncol 9:1007. https://doi.org/10.3389/fonc.2019.01007CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentral

85.

Xue P, Tang C, Li Q et al (2020) Development and validation of an artificial intelligence system for grading colposcopic impressions and guiding biopsies. BMC Med 18:406. https://doi.org/10.1186/s12916-020-01860-yCrossRefPubMedPubMedCentral

86.

Xue P, Wang J, Qin D et al (2022) Deep learning in image-based breast and cervical cancer detection: a systematic review and meta-analysis. NPJ Digit Med 5:19. https://doi.org/10.1038/s41746-022-00559-zCrossRefPubMedPubMedCentral

87.

Zhang L, Huang J, Liu L (2019) Improved deep learning network based in combination with cost-sensitive learning for early detection of ovarian cancer in color ultrasound detecting system. J Med Syst 43:251. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10916-019-1356-8CrossRefPubMed

88.

Zhang Y, Gong C, Zheng L et al (2021) Deep learning for intelligent recognition and prediction of endometrial cancer. J Healthc Eng. https://doi.org/10.1155/2021/1148309CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentral

89.

Zhang Y, Wang Z, Zhang J et al (2021) Deep learning model for classifying endometrial lesions. J Transl Med 19:10. https://doi.org/10.1186/s12967-020-02660-xCrossRefPubMedPubMedCentral

90.

Zhou J, Zeng ZY, Li L (2020) Progress of artificial intelligence in gynecological malignant tumors. Cancer Manag Res 12:12823–12840. https://doi.org/10.2147/CMAR.S279990CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentral

91.

Zimmerli WC (2021) Künstliche Intelligenz – ein Mythos des 21. Jahrhunderts? Gynäkologe 54:471–475. https://doi.org/10.1007/s00129-021-04811-7CrossRef

92.

Zimmer-Stelmach A, Zak J, Pawlosek A et al (2022) The application of artificial intelligence-assisted colposcopy in a tertiary care hospital within a cervical pathology diagnostic unit. Diagnostics 12:106. https://doi.org/10.3390/diagnostics12010106CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentral

93.

Zondervan KT, Becker CM, Koga K et al (2018) Endometriosis. Nat Rev Dis Primers 4:9. https://doi.org/10.1038/s41572-018-0008-5CrossRefPubMed

Titel: Aktuelle Aspekte zur künstlichen Intelligenz in der gynäkologischen Diagnostik
verfasst von: Dr. Jann Lennard Scharf
Christoph Dracopoulos
Michael Gembicki
Amrei Welp
Jan Weichert
Publikationsdatum: 13.09.2022
Verlag: Springer Medizin
Schlagwörter: Kolposkopie
Endometriose
Ovarialkarzinom
Endometriumkarzinom
Zervixkarzinom
Endometriumkarzinom
Ovarialkarzinom
Zervixkarzinom
Kolposkopie
Künstliche Intelligenz
Gynäkologische Diagnostik
Erschienen in: Die Gynäkologie / Ausgabe 10/2022
Print ISSN: 2731-7102
Elektronische ISSN: 2731-7110
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s00129-022-04993-8

Neu im Fachgebiet Gynäkologie und Geburtshilfe

Alter der Mutter beeinflusst Risiko für kongenitale Anomalie

28.05.2024 Kinder- und Jugendgynäkologie Nachrichten

Welchen Einfluss das Alter ihrer Mutter auf das Risiko hat, dass Kinder mit nicht chromosomal bedingter Malformation zur Welt kommen, hat eine ungarische Studie untersucht. Sie zeigt: Nicht nur fortgeschrittenes Alter ist riskant.

Fehlerkultur in der Medizin – Offenheit zählt!

28.05.2024 Internistische Arzneimitteltherapie Podcast

Darüber reden und aus Fehlern lernen, sollte das Motto in der Medizin lauten. Und zwar nicht nur im Sinne der Patientensicherheit. Eine negative Fehlerkultur kann auch die Behandelnden ernsthaft krank machen, warnt Prof. Dr. Reinhard Strametz. Ein Plädoyer und ein Leitfaden für den offenen Umgang mit kritischen Ereignissen in Medizin und Pflege.

Mammakarzinom: Brustdichte beeinflusst rezidivfreies Überleben

26.05.2024 Mammakarzinom Nachrichten

Frauen, die zum Zeitpunkt der Brustkrebsdiagnose eine hohe mammografische Brustdichte aufweisen, haben ein erhöhtes Risiko für ein baldiges Rezidiv, legen neue Daten nahe.

Mehr Lebenszeit mit Abemaciclib bei fortgeschrittenem Brustkrebs?

24.05.2024 Mammakarzinom Nachrichten

In der MONARCHE-3-Studie lebten Frauen mit fortgeschrittenem Hormonrezeptor-positivem, HER2-negativem Brustkrebs länger, wenn sie zusätzlich zu einem nicht steroidalen Aromatasehemmer mit Abemaciclib behandelt wurden; allerdings verfehlte der numerische Zugewinn die statistische Signifikanz.

Update Gynäkologie

Bestellen Sie unseren Fach-Newsletter und bleiben Sie gut informiert – ganz bequem per eMail.

Newsletter bestellen

Live-Webinar "Urologie und Sexualmedizin in der Praxis"

Springer Medizin

Zusammenfassung

Bitte loggen Sie sich ein, um Zugang zu diesem Inhalt zu erhalten

Weitere Artikel der Ausgabe 10/2022

Medizinrecht

Künstliche Intelligenz in der Gynäkologie und Geburtshilfe

Der Mythos vom „Jungfernhäutchen“

Wie künstliche Intelligenz im pränatalen sonographischen Screening eingesetzt werden kann