Vol 28, No 3 (2021)
Review Article
Published online: 2020-07-10

open access

Page views 1945
Article views/downloads 1796
Get Citation

Connect on Social Media

Connect on Social Media

Clinical applications of artificial intelligence in cardiology on the verge of the decade

Konrad Pieszko12, Jarosław Hiczkiewicz12, Jan Budzianowski12, Bogdan Musielak12, Dariusz Hiczkiewicz12, Wojciech Faron2, Janusz Rzeźniczak3, Paweł Burchardt34
Pubmed: 32648252
Cardiol J 2021;28(3):460-472.


Artificial intelligence (AI) has been hailed as the fourth industrial revolution and its influence on people’s lives is increasing. The research on AI applications in medicine is progressing rapidly. This revolution shows promise for more precise diagnoses, streamlined workflows, increased accessibility to healthcare services and new insights into ever-growing population-wide datasets. While some applications have already found their way into contemporary patient care, we are still in the early days of the AI-era in medicine. Despite the popularity of these new technologies, many practitioners lack an understanding of AI methods, their benefits, and pitfalls. This review aims to provide information about the general concepts of machine learning (ML) with special focus on the applications of such techniques in cardiovascular medicine. It also sets out the current trends in research related to medical applications of AI. Along with new possibilities, new threats arise — acknowledging and understanding them is as important as understanding the ML methodology itself. Therefore, attention is also paid to the current opinions and guidelines regarding the validation and safety of AI-powered tools.

Article available in PDF format

View PDF Download PDF file


  1. Gates M, Wingert A, Featherstone R, et al. Impact of fatigue and insufficient sleep on physician and patient outcomes: a systematic review. BMJ Open. 2018; 8(9): e021967.
  2. Rajkomar A, Dean J, Kohane I, et al. Machine Learning in Medicine. N Engl J Med. 2019; 380(14): 1347–1358.
  3. Benjamins JW, Hendriks T, Knuuti J, et al. A primer in artificial intelligence in cardiovascular medicine. Neth Heart J. 2019; 27(9): 392–402.
  4. Liu Y, Chen PHC, Krause J, et al. How to read articles that use machine learning: users' guides to the medical literature. JAMA. 2019; 322(18): 1806–1816.
  5. Johnson KW, Torres Soto J, Glicksberg BS, et al. Artificial Intelligence in Cardiology. J Am Coll Cardiol. 2018; 71(23): 2668–2679.
  6. Shameer K, Johnson KW, Glicksberg BS, et al. Machine learning in cardiovascular medicine: are we there yet? Heart. 2018; 104(14): 1156–1164.
  7. Mazzanti M, Shirka E, Gjergo H, et al. Imaging, health record, and artificial intelligence: hype or hope? Curr Cardiol Rep. 2018; 20(6): 48.
  8. Seetharam K, Shrestha S, Sengupta PP. Artificial Intelligence in Cardiovascular Medicine. Curr Treat Options Cardiovasc Med. 2019; 21(6): 25.
  9. Dorado-Díaz PI, Sampedro-Gómez J, Vicente-Palacios V, et al. Applications of artificial intelligence in cardiology. The future is already here. Rev Esp Cardiol (Engl Ed). 2019; 72(12): 1065–1075.
  10. Dey D, Slomka PJ, Leeson P, et al. Artificial intelligence in cardiovascular imaging: JACC state-of-the-art review. J Am Coll Cardiol. 2019; 73(11): 1317–1335.
  11. Siegersma KR, Leiner T, Chew DP, et al. Artificial intelligence in cardiovascular imaging: state of the art and implications for the imaging cardiologist. Neth Heart J. 2019; 27(9): 403–413.
  12. Litjens G, Ciompi F, Wolterink JM, et al. State-of-the-Art Deep Learning in Cardiovascular Image Analysis. JACC Cardiovasc Imaging. 2019; 12(8 Pt 1): 1549–1565.
  13. Litjens G, Ciompi F, Wolterink JM, et al. State-of-the-Art Deep Learning in Cardiovascular Image Analysis. JACC Cardiovasc Imaging. 2019; 12(8 Pt 1): 1549–1565.
  14. Gulshan V, Peng L, Coram M, et al. Development and validation of a deep learning algorithm for detection of diabetic retinopathy in retinal fundus photographs. JAMA. 2016; 316(22): 2402–2410.
  15. Beleites C, Neugebauer U, Bocklitz T, et al. Sample size planning for classification models. Anal Chim Acta. 2013; 760: 25–33.
  16. Silver D, Huang A, Maddison CJ, et al. Mastering the game of Go with deep neural networks and tree search. Nature. 2016; 529(7587): 484–489.
  17. LeCun Y, Bengio Y, Hinton G. Deep learning. Nature. 2015; 521(7553): 436–444.
  18. Bizopoulos P, Koutsouris D. Deep learning in cardiology. IEEE Rev Biomed Eng. 2019; 12: 168–193.
  19. Poplin R, Varadarajan AV, Blumer K, et al. Prediction of cardiovascular risk factors from retinal fundus photographs via deep learning. Nat Biomed Eng. 2018; 2(3): 158–164.
  20. Attia ZI, Noseworthy PA, Lopez-Jimenez F, et al. An artificial intelligence-enabled ECG algorithm for the identification of patients with atrial fibrillation during sinus rhythm: a retrospective analysis of outcome prediction. Lancet. 2019; 394(10201): 861–867.
  21. Attia ZI, Kapa S, Lopez-Jimenez F, et al. Screening for cardiac contractile dysfunction using an artificial intelligence-enabled electrocardiogram. Nat Med. 2019; 25(1): 70–74.
  22. Attia ZI, Kapa S, Yao X, et al. Prospective validation of a deep learning electrocardiogram algorithm for the detection of left ventricular systolic dysfunction. J Cardiovasc Electrophysiol. 2019; 30(5): 668–674.
  23. Yao X, McCoy RG, Friedman PA, et al. ECG AI-Guided Screening for Low Ejection Fraction (EAGLE): Rationale and design of a pragmatic cluster randomized trial. Am Heart J. 2020; 219: 31–36.
  24. Shah SJ, Katz DH, Selvaraj S, et al. Phenomapping for novel classification of heart failure with preserved ejection fraction. Circulation. 2015; 131(3): 269–279.
  25. Katz DH, Deo RC, Aguilar FG, et al. Phenomapping for the Identification of Hypertensive Patients with the Myocardial Substrate for Heart Failure with Preserved Ejection Fraction. J Cardiovasc Transl Res. 2017; 10(3): 275–284.
  26. Krittanawong C, Zhang H, Wang Z, et al. Artificial Intelligence in Precision Cardiovascular Medicine. J Am Coll Cardiol. 2017; 69(21): 2657–2664.
  27. Wang L, Tong L, Davis D, et al. The application of unsupervised deep learning in predictive models using electronic health records. BMC Med Res Methodol. 2020; 20(1): 37.
  28. Madani A, Arnaout R, Mofrad M, et al. Fast and accurate view classification of echocardiograms using deep learning. NPJ Digit Med. 2018; 1.
  29. Sengupta PP, Huang YM, Bansal M, et al. Cognitive Machine-Learning Algorithm for Cardiac Imaging: A Pilot Study for Differentiating Constrictive Pericarditis From Restrictive Cardiomyopathy. Circ Cardiovasc Imaging. 2016; 9(6).
  30. Zhang J, Gajjala S, Agrawal P, et al. Fully Automated Echocardiogram Interpretation in Clinical Practice. Circulation. 2018; 138(16): 1623–1635.
  31. Wolterink JM, Leiner T, de Vos BD, et al. Automatic coronary artery calcium scoring in cardiac CT angiography using paired convolutional neural networks. Med Image Anal. 2016; 34: 123–136.
  32. Coenen A, Kim YH, Kruk M, et al. Diagnostic accuracy of a machine-learning approach to coronary computed tomographic angiography-based fractional flow reserve: result from the MACHINE consortium. Circ Cardiovasc Imaging. 2018; 11(6): e007217.
  33. Tesche C, De Cecco CN, Baumann S, et al. Coronary CT angiography-derived fractional flow reserve: machine learning algorithm versus computational fluid dynamics modeling. Radiology. 2018; 288(1): 64–72.
  34. Motwani M, Dey D, Berman DS, et al. Machine learning for prediction of all-cause mortality in patients with suspected coronary artery disease: a 5-year multicentre prospective registry analysis. Eur Heart J. 2017; 38(7): 500–507.
  35. Wolterink JM, Leiner T, Viergever MA, et al. Generative adversarial networks for noise reduction in low-dose CT. IEEE Trans Med Imaging. 2017; 36(12): 2536–2545.
  36. Zreik M, Lessmann N, van Hamersvelt RW, et al. Deep learning analysis of the myocardium in coronary CT angiography for identification of patients with functionally significant coronary artery stenosis. Med Image Anal. 2018; 44: 72–85.
  37. Haro Alonso D, Wernick MN, Yang Y, et al. Prediction of cardiac death after adenosine myocardial perfusion SPECT based on machine learning. J Nucl Cardiol. 2019; 26(5): 1746–1754.
  38. Betancur J, Commandeur F, Motlagh M, et al. Deep learning for prediction of obstructive disease from fast myocardial perfusion SPECT: a multicenter study. JACC Cardiovasc Imaging. 2018; 11(11): 1654–1663.
  39. Betancur J, Hu LH, Commandeur F, et al. Deep learning analysis of upright-supine high-efficiency SPECT myocardial perfusion imaging for prediction of obstructive coronary artery disease: a multicenter study. J Nucl Med. 2019; 60(5): 664–670.
  40. Betancur J, Otaki Y, Motwani M, et al. Prognostic value of combined clinical and Myocardial perfusion imaging data using machine learning. JACC Cardiovasc Imaging. 2018; 11(7): 1000–1009.
  41. Bai W, Sinclair M, Tarroni G, et al. Automated cardiovascular magnetic resonance image analysis with fully convolutional networks. J Cardiovasc Magn Reson. 2018; 20(1): 65.
  42. Fries JA, Varma P, Chen VS, et al. Weakly supervised classification of aortic valve malformations using unlabeled cardiac MRI sequences. Nat Commun. 2019; 10(1): 3111.
  43. Yang G, Zhuang X, Khan H, et al. Fully automatic segmentation and objective assessment of atrial scars for long-standing persistent atrial fibrillation patients using late gadolinium-enhanced MRI. Med Phys. 2018; 45(4): 1562–1576.
  44. Swift AJ, Lu H, Uthoff J, et al. A machine learning cardiac magnetic resonance approach to extract disease features and automate pulmonary arterial hypertension diagnosis. Eur Heart J Cardiovasc Imaging. 2020 [Epub ahead of print].
  45. Yang Su, Kweon J, Roh JH, et al. Deep learning segmentation of major vessels in X-ray coronary angiography. Sci Rep. 2019; 9(1): 16897.
  46. Kwon JM, Kim KH, Akkus Z, et al. Artificial intelligence for detecting mitral regurgitation using electrocardiography. J Electrocardiol. 2020; 59: 151–157.
  47. Weng SF, Reps J, Kai J, et al. Can machine-learning improve cardiovascular risk prediction using routine clinical data? PLoS One. 2017; 12(4): e0174944.
  48. Rajkomar A, Oren E, Chen K, et al. Scalable and accurate deep learning with electronic health records. NPJ Digit Med. 2018; 1: 18.
  49. Brajer N, Cozzi B, Gao M, et al. Prospective and External Evaluation of a Machine Learning Model to Predict In-Hospital Mortality of Adults at Time of Admission. JAMA Netw Open. 2020; 3(2): e1920733.
  50. Shameer K, Johnson KW, Yahi A, et al. Predictive modeling of hospital readmission rates using electronic medical record-wide machine learning: a case-study using mount sinai heart failure cohort. Pac Symp Biocomput. 2017; 22: 276–287.
  51. Shouval R, Hadanny A, Shlomo N, et al. Machine learning for prediction of 30-day mortality after ST elevation myocardial infraction: an acute coronary syndrome israeli survey data mining study. Int J Cardiol. 2017; 246: 7–13.
  52. Wallert J, Tomasoni M, Madison G, et al. Predicting two-year survival versus non-survival after first myocardial infarction using machine learning and Swedish national register data. BMC Med Inform Decis Mak. 2017; 17(1): 99.
  53. Pieszko K, Hiczkiewicz J, Budzianowski P, et al. Predicting long-term mortality after acute coronary syndrome using machine learning techniques and hematological markers. Dis Markers. 2019; 2019: 9056402.
  54. Pieszko K, Hiczkiewicz J, Budzianowski P, et al. Machine-learned models using hematological inflammation markers in the prediction of short-term acute coronary syndrome outcomes. J Transl Med. 2018; 16(1): 334.
  55. Gibson WJ, Nafee T, Travis R, et al. Machine learning versus traditional risk stratification methods in acute coronary syndrome: a pooled randomized clinical trial analysis. J Thromb Thrombolysis. 2020; 49(1): 1–9.
  56. Kalscheur MM, Kipp RT, Tattersall MC, et al. Machine learning algorithm predicts cardiac resynchronization therapy outcomes: lessons from the COMPANION trial. Circ Arrhythm Electrophysiol. 2018; 11(1): e005499.
  57. Panch T, Mattie H, Celi L. The “inconvenient truth” about AI in healthcare. npj Digital Medicine. 2019; 2(1).
  58. Oakden-Rayner L, Dunnmon J, Carneiro G, et al. Hidden stratification causes clinically meaningful failures in machine learning for medical imaging. Proceedings of the ACM Conference on Health, Inference, and Learning. 2020.
  59. Esteva A, Kuprel B, Novoa RA, et al. Dermatologist-level classification of skin cancer with deep neural networks. Nature. 2017; 542(7639): 115–118.
  60. Goodman B, Flaxman S. European Union Regulations on Algorithmic Decision-Making and a “Right to Explanation”. AI Magazine. 2017; 38(3): 50–57.
  61. Gale W, Oakden-Rayner L, Carneiro G, et al. Producing radiologist-quality reports for interpretable deep learning. 2019 IEEE 16th International Symposium on Biomedical Imaging (ISBI 2019). 2019.
  62. Parasuraman R, Manzey DH. Complacency and bias in human use of automation: an attentional integration. Hum Factors. 2010; 52(3): 381–410.
  63. Hripcsak G, Knirsch C, Zhou Li, et al. Bias associated with mining electronic health records. J Biomed Discov Collab. 2011; 6: 48–52.
  64. Gianfrancesco MA, Tamang S, Yazdany J, et al. Potential biases in machine learning algorithms using electronic health record data. JAMA Intern Med. 2018; 178(11): 1544–1547.
  65. Parikh RB, Teeple S, Navathe AS. Addressing bias in artificial intelligence in health care. JAMA. 2019 [Epub ahead of print].
  66. Gur D, Bandos A, Cohen C, et al. The “laboratory” effect: comparing radiologists' performance and variability during prospective clinical and laboratory mammography interpretations. Radiology. 2008; 249(1): 47–53.
  67. Lehman CD, Wellman RD, Buist DSM, et al. Breast Cancer Surveillance Consortium. Diagnostic accuracy of digital screening mammography with and without computer-aided detection. JAMA Intern Med. 2015; 175(11): 1828–1837.
  68. Angus DC. Randomized clinical trials of artificial intelligence. JAMA. 2020 [Epub ahead of print].
  69. Wang Pu, Berzin TM, Glissen Brown JR, et al. Real-time automatic detection system increases colonoscopic polyp and adenoma detection rates: a prospective randomised controlled study. Gut. 2019; 68(10): 1813–1819.
  70. Wijnberge M, Geerts BF, Hol L, et al. Effect of a machine learning-derived early warning system for intraoperative hypotension vs standard care on depth and duration of intraoperative hypotension during elective noncardiac surgery: the HYPE randomized clinical trial. JAMA. 2020 [Epub ahead of print].
  71. Schwab K. The fourth industrial revolution. Currency. 2017: 192.