Related Experiment Video
Updated: May 31, 2026

Retrospective Cardiac Gating with A Prototype Small-Animal X-ray Computed Tomograph
Published on: February 21, 2025
Deep learning for cardiac MRI: performance evidence and barriers to clinical integration. A Systematic Review and
Fatemah Aladwani1,2, Alessandro Perelli3,4, Ify Mordi1
1Department of Cardiovascular Research, School of Medicine, University of Dundee, Dundee DD1 9SY, UK.
Aims:
This systematic review and meta-analysis aimed to evaluate the current evidence on the use of deep learning in cardiac magnetic resonance imaging, focusing on image segmentation, prediction, and diagnosis.
Methods And Results:
A systematic search of Medline, Web of Science, Embase, and Scopus identified studies published between 2020 and 2025. Eligible studies comprised deep learning-based segmentation, prediction, or diagnosis of cardiac magnetic resonance images. MetaDisc version 1.4 was used for statistical analysis, with a P < 0.05 and an I2 ≥ 75% used as the thresholds for statistical significance and high heterogeneity, respectively. From 1510 retrieved articles, 62 studies met the inclusion criteria, and 12 studies were included in the meta-analysis. Most studies targeted segmentation (n & 45), with fewer addressing diagnosis (n & 9), and prediction (n & 28). Supervised learning predominated (91.94%), and U-Net was the most common architecture (70.97%). Mean Dice score (15 studies) was 0.91 ± 0.03, whereas mean Hausdorff distance (six studies) was 8.99 ± 6.45 mm. Diagnosis and prediction achieved pooled sensitivity of 0.94 (95% CI: 0.92-0.96), specificity of 0.91 (95% CI: 0.89-0.93), and AUC of 0.9831, indicating excellent discriminative ability. Segmentation models reached pooled sensitivity of 1.00 (95% CI: 0.99-1.00) and specificity of 0.98 (95% CI: 0.98-0.99). The AUC from the SROC analysis was 0.9940, confirming exceptional segmentation accuracy.
Conclusion:
Deep learning models show excellent performance in cardiac magnetic resonance segmentation and diagnosis, often matching or exceeding manual analysis, indicating strong potential for clinical adoption.This systematic review was registered in the International Prospective Register of Systematic Reviews (PROSPERO) with the registration number CRD42023439659.
Related Concept Videos
Observational Studies
There are three types of observational studies – Prospective, retrospective, and cross-sectional.
Prospective Study
Prospective studies, also known as longitudinal or cohort studies, are carried out by collecting future data from groups sharing similar characteristics. One example of...
Methods of Documentation VII: EMR
Documentation in Long-Term and Home Healthcare Setting
Long-Term Care Facilities
Introduction to Epidemiology
Pulmonary Embolism II: Diagnostic Studies and Interprofessional Care