Artificial Intelligence (AI) has brought new opportunities in medicine, with a great potential to improve care provided to patients. Given the technical complexity and continuously evolving field, it can be challenging for vascular specialists to anticipate and foresee how AI will shape their practice. The aim of this review is to provide an overview of the current landscape of applications of AI in clinical practice for the management of non-cardiac vascular diseases including aortic aneurysm, peripheral artery disease, carotid stenosis, and venous diseases. The review describes and highlights how AI has the potential to shape the three pillars in the management of vascular diseases including clinical practice, medical research and education. In the limelight of these results, we show how AI should be considered and developed within a responsible ecosystem favoring transdisciplinary collaboration, where multiple stake holders can work together to face current challenges and move forward future directions.
QuerGArnaoutRHenneMArnaoutR.Machine learning and the future of cardiovascular care: JACC state-of-the-art review. J Am Coll Cardiol. 2021;77:300-13.
7.
LareyreFChaptoukaevHKiangSC, et al. Telemedicine and digital health applications in vascular surgery. J Clin Med. 2022;11:6047.
8.
TomihamaRTCamaraJRKiangSC.Machine learning analysis of confounding variables of a convolutional neural network specific for abdominal aortic aneurysms. JVS Vasc Sci. 2023;4:100096.
9.
GollaAKTonnesCRussT, et al. Automated screening for abdominal aortic aneurysm in CT scans under clinical conditions using deep learning. Diagnostics (Basel). 2021;11:2131.
10.
RaffortJAdamCCarrierM, et al. Artificial intelligence in abdominal aortic aneurysm. J Vasc Surg. 2020;72:321-33.e1.
11.
CamaraJRTomihamaRTPopA, et al. Development of a convolutional neural network to detect abdominal aortic aneurysms. J Vasc Surg Cases Innov Tech. 2022;8:305-11.
12.
KodenkoMRVasilevYAVladzymyrskyyAV, et al. Diagnostic accuracy of AI for opportunistic screening of abdominal aortic aneurysm in CT: a systematic review and narrative synthesis. Diagnostics (Basel). 2022;12:3197.
13.
MacruzFBCLuCStroutJ, et al. Quantification of the thoracic aorta and detection of aneurysm at CT: development and validation of a fully automatic methodology. Radiol Artif Intell. 2022;4:e210076.
14.
McLenonMOkuhnSLancasterEM, et al. Validation of natural language processing to determine the presence and size of abdominal aortic aneurysms in a large integrated health system. J Vasc Surg. 2021;74:459-66.e3.
15.
AboyansVRiccoJBBartelinkMEL, et al. Editor’s choice - 2017 ESC guidelines on the diagnosis and treatment of peripheral arterial diseases, in collaboration with the European Society for Vascular Surgery (ESVS). Eur J Vasc Endovasc Surg. 2018;55:305-68.
16.
RossEGShahNHDalmanRLNeadKTCookeJPLeeperNJ.The use of machine learning for the identification of peripheral artery disease and future mortality risk. J Vasc Surg. 2016;64:1515-22.e3.
17.
McCarthyCPIbrahimNEvan KimmenadeRRJ, et al. A clinical and proteomics approach to predict the presence of obstructive peripheral arterial disease: from the Catheter Sampled Blood Archive in Cardiovascular Diseases (CASABLANCA) Study. Clin Cardiol. 2018;41:903-9.
18.
GaoJMRenZHPanX, et al. Identifying peripheral arterial disease in the elderly patients using machine-learning algorithms. Aging Clin Exp Res. 2022;34:679-85.
19.
LareyreFBehrendtCAChaudhuriA, et al. Applications of artificial intelligence for patients with peripheral artery disease. J Vasc Surg. 2023;77:650-8.e1.
20.
AfzalNSohnSAbramS, et al. Mining peripheral arterial disease cases from narrative clinical notes using natural language processing. J Vasc Surg. 2017;65:1753-61.
21.
SavovaGKFanJYeZ, et al. Discovering peripheral arterial disease cases from radiology notes using natural language processing. AMIA Annu Symp Proc. 2010;2010:722-6.
22.
WeisslerEHZhangJLippmannSRusincovitchSHenaoRJonesWS.Use of natural language processing to improve identification of patients with peripheral artery disease. Circ Cardiovasc Interv. 2020;13:e009447.
23.
FribergJEQaziAHBoyleB, et al. Ankle- and toe-brachial index for peripheral artery disease identification: unlocking clinical data through novel methods. Circ Cardiovasc Interv. 2022;15:e011092.
24.
GhanzouriIAmalSHoV, et al. Performance and usability testing of an automated tool for detection of peripheral artery disease using electronic health records. Sci Rep. 2022;12:13364.
25.
NaylorARRiccoJBde BorstGJ, et al. Editor’s choice - Management of atherosclerotic carotid and vertebral artery disease: 2017 clinical practice guidelines of the European Society for Vascular Surgery (ESVS). Eur J Vasc Endovasc Surg. 2018;55:3-81.
26.
OttakathNAl-MaadeedSZughaierSM, et al. Ultrasound-based image analysis for predicting carotid artery stenosis risk: a comprehensive review of the problem, techniques, datasets, and future directions. Diagnostics (Basel). 2023;13:2614.
27.
KordzadehAAskariAAbbassiOASanoudosNMohagheghVShirvaniH.Artificial intelligence and duplex ultrasound for detection of carotid artery disease. 2023;31:1187-93.
28.
YangYHuanXGuoDWangXNiuSLiK.Performance of deep learning-based autodetection of arterial stenosis on head and neck CT angiography: an independent external validation study. Radiol Med. 2023;128:1103-15.
29.
JainPKDubeyASabaL, et al. Attention-based UNet deep learning model for plaque segmentation in carotid ultrasound for stroke risk stratification: an artificial intelligence paradigm. J Cardiovasc Dev Dis. 2022;9:326.
30.
GleissnerCKaczmarzSKuferJ, et al. Hemodynamic MRI parameters to predict asymptomatic unilateral carotid artery stenosis with random forest machine learning. Front Neuroimaging. 2023;1:1056503.
31.
ChangRWTuckerLYRothenbergKA, et al. Establishing a carotid artery stenosis disease cohort for comparative effectiveness research using natural language processing. J Vasc Surg. 2021;74:1937-47.e3.
32.
KainzBHeinrichMPMakropoulosA, et al. Non-invasive diagnosis of deep vein thrombosis from ultrasound imaging with machine learning. NPJ Digit Med. 2021;4:137.
33.
HuangCTianJYuanC, et al. Fully automated segmentation of lower extremity deep vein thrombosis using convolutional neural network. Biomed Res Int. 2019;2019:3401683.
34.
SeoJWParkSKimYJ, et al. Artificial intelligence-based iliofemoral deep venous thrombosis detection using a clinical approach. Sci Rep. 2023;13:967.
35.
ChiasakulTLamBDMcNicholM, et al. Artificial intelligence in the prediction of venous thromboembolism: a systematic review and pooled analysis. Eur J Haematol. 2023;111:951-62.
36.
OliveiraBTorresHRMoraisP, et al. A multi-task convolutional neural network for classification and segmentation of chronic venous disorders. Sci Rep. 2023;13:761.
37.
WanhainenAVerziniFVan HerzeeleI, et al. Editor’s choice - European Society for Vascular Surgery (ESVS) 2019 clinical practice guidelines on the management of abdominal aorto-iliac artery aneurysms. Eur J Vasc Endovasc Surg. 2019;57:8-93.
38.
LeeRJarchiDPereraR, et al. Applied machine learning for the prediction of growth of abdominal aortic aneurysm in humans. EJVES Short Rep. 2018;39:24-8.
39.
KimSJiangZZambranoBA, et al. Deep learning on multiphysical features and hemodynamic modeling for abdominal aortic aneurysm growth prediction. IEEE Trans Med Imaging. 2023;42:196-208.
40.
WangYXiongFLeachJ, et al. Contrast-enhanced CT radiomics improves the prediction of abdominal aortic aneurysm progression. Eur Radiol. 2023;33:3444-54.
41.
RezaeitaleshmahallehMSunderlandKWLyuZ, et al. Computerized differentiation of growth status for abdominal aortic aneurysms: a feasibility study. J Cardiovasc Transl Res. 2023;16:874-85.
42.
JalalahmadiGHelgueraMLinteCA.A machine leaning approach for abdominal aortic aneurysm severity assessment using geometric, biomechanical, and patient-specific historical clinical features. Proc SPIE Int Soc Opt Eng. 2020;11317:1131713.
43.
OstbergNPZafarMAMukherjeeSKZiganshinBAElefteriadesJA.A machine learning approach for predicting complications in descending and thoracoabdominal aortic aneurysms. J Thorac Cardiovasc Surg. 2023;166:1011-20.e3.
44.
MasudaTBabaYNakauraT, et al. Applying patient characteristics, stent-graft selection, and pre-operative computed tomographic angiography data to a machine learning algorithm: is endoleak prediction possible?Radiography (Lond). 2022;28:906-11.
45.
CharalambousSKlontzasMEKontopodisN, et al. Radiomics and machine learning to predict aggressive type 2 endoleaks after endovascular aneurysm repair: a proof of concept. Acta Radiol. 2022;63:1293-9.
46.
KarthikesalingamAAttallahOMaX, et al. An artificial neural network stratifies the risks of reintervention and mortality after endovascular aneurysm repair; a retrospective observational study. PLoS One. 2015;10:e0129024.
47.
ZhangLWeiJWeiJ, et al. Identification of clinical heterogeneity and construction of prediction models for novel subtypes in patients with abdominal aortic aneurysm: an unsupervised machine learning study. Ann Vasc Surg. 2024:98:75-86.
48.
LiBVermaRBeatonD, et al. Predicting outcomes following endovascular abdominal aortic aneurysm repair using machine learning. 2024;279:521-7.
49.
SaittaSSturlaFCaimiA, et al. A deep learning-based and fully automated pipeline for thoracic aorta geometric analysis and planning for endovascular repair from computed tomography. J Digit Imaging. 2022;35:226-39.
50.
DeryckeLSenemaudJPerrinD, et al. Patient specific computer modelling for automated sizing of fenestrated stent grafts. Eur J Vasc Endovasc Surg. 2020;59:237-46.
51.
DeryckeLAvrilSVermuntJ, et al. Computational prediction of proximal sealing in endovascular abdominal aortic aneurysm repair with unfavorable necks. Comput Methods Programs Biomed. 2024;244:107993.
52.
PionteckAPierratBGorgesSAlbertiniJNAvrilS.Evaluation and verification of fast computational simulations of stent-graft deployment in endovascular aneurysmal repair. Front Med Technol. 2021;3:704806.
53.
KliewerMEBordetMChaventB, et al. Assessment of fenestrated Anaconda stent graft design by numerical simulation: results of a European prospective multicenter study. J Vasc Surg. 2022;75:99-108.e2.
54.
LiBAljabriBVermaR, et al. Using machine learning to predict outcomes following open abdominal aortic aneurysm repair. J Vasc Surg. 2023;78:1426-38.e6.
55.
Monsalve-TorraARuiz-FernandezDMarin-AlonsoOSoriano-PayaACamacho-MackenzieJCarreno-JaimesM.Using machine learning methods for predicting inhospital mortality in patients undergoing open repair of abdominal aortic aneurysm. J Biomed Inform. 2016;62:195-201.
56.
WiseESHockingKMBrophyCM.Prediction of in-hospital mortality after ruptured abdominal aortic aneurysm repair using an artificial neural network. J Vasc Surg. 2015;62:8-15.
57.
ShengCLiaoMZhouHYangP.Machine learning model predicts the occurrence of acute kidney injury after open surgery for abdominal aortic aneurysm repair. Zhong Nan Da Xue Xue Bao Yi Xue Ban. 2023;48:213-20.
58.
RossEGJungKDudleyJTLiLLeeperNJShahNH.Predicting future cardiovascular events in patients with peripheral artery disease using electronic health record data. Circ Cardiovasc Qual Outcomes. 2019;12:e004741.
59.
ZhangDLiYKalbaughCA, et al. Machine learning approach to predict in-hospital mortality in patients admitted for peripheral artery disease in the United States. J Am Heart Assoc. 2022;11:e026987.
60.
CoxMPanagidesJCTabariAKalvaSKalpathy-CramerJDayeD.Risk stratification with explainable machine learning for 30-day procedure-related mortality and 30-day unplanned readmission in patients with peripheral arterial disease. PLoS One. 2022;17:e0277507.
61.
PanTJiangXLiuHLiuYFuWDongZ.Prediction of 2-year major adverse limb event-free survival after percutaneous transluminal angioplasty and stenting for lower limb atherosclerosis obliterans: a machine learning-based study. Front Cardiovasc Med. 2022;9:783336.
62.
CoxMReidNPanagidesJC, et al. Interpretable machine learning for the prediction of amputation risk following lower extremity infrainguinal endovascular interventions for peripheral arterial disease. Cardiovasc Intervent Radiol. 2022;45:633-40.
63.
LiuYXueJJiangJ.Application of machine learning algorithms in electronic medical records to predict amputation-free survival after first revascularization in patients with peripheral artery disease. Int J Cardiol. 2023;383:175-84.
64.
CoxMPanagidesJCDi CapuaJ, et al. An interpretable machine learning model for the prevention of contrast-induced nephropathy in patients undergoing lower extremity endovascular interventions for peripheral arterial disease. Clin Imaging. 2023;101:1-7.
65.
ChungJFreemanNLBKosorokMRMarstonWAConteMSMcGinigleKL.Analysis of a machine learning-based risk stratification scheme for chronic limb-threatening ischemia. JAMA Netw Open. 2022;5:e223424.
66.
BergerJSHaskellLTingW, et al. Evaluation of machine learning methodology for the prediction of healthcare resource utilization and healthcare costs in patients with critical limb ischemia-is preventive and personalized approach on the horizon?EPMA J. 2020;11:53-64.
67.
LoCMHungPH.Predictive stroke risk model with vision transformer-based Doppler features. Med Phys. 2024;51:126-38.
68.
XiaHYuanLZhaoW, et al. Predicting transient ischemic attack risk in patients with mild carotid stenosis using machine learning and CT radiomics. Front Neurol. 2023;14:1105616.
69.
ZhangRZhangQJiA, et al. Identification of high-risk carotid plaque with MRI-based radiomics and machine learning. Eur Radiol. 2021;31:3116-26.
70.
GuiCCaoCZhangXZhangJNiGMingD.Radiomics and artificial neural networks modelling for identification of high-risk carotid plaques. Front Cardiovasc Med. 2023;10:1173769.
71.
MatsuoKFujitaAHosodaK, et al. Potential of machine learning to predict early ischemic events after carotid endarterectomy or stenting: a comparison with surgeon predictions. Neurosurg Rev. 2022;45:607-16.
72.
ZhangYZhangHWangH, et al. Tandem mass tag-based quantitative proteomic analysis identification of succinylation related proteins in pathogenesis of thoracic aortic aneurysm and aortic dissection. PeerJ. 2023;11:e15258.
73.
Chun-AnCHung-WenC.An artificial neural network model for the evaluation of carotid artery stenting prognosis using a national-wide database. Annu Int Conf IEEE Eng Med Biol Soc. 2017;2017:2566-9.
74.
AmritphaleAChatterjeeRChatterjeeS, et al. Predictors of 30-day unplanned readmission after carotid artery stenting using artificial intelligence. Adv Ther. 2021;38:2954-72.
75.
YuTShenRYouG, et al. Machine learning-based prediction of the post-thrombotic syndrome: model development and validation study. Front Cardiovasc Med. 2022;9:990788.
76.
TaylorRJTaylorADSmythJV.Using an artificial neural network to predict healing times and risk factors for venous leg ulcers. J Wound Care. 2002;11:101-5.
77.
LareyreFChaudhuriANasrBRaffortJ.Machine learning and omics analysis in aortic aneurysm. Angiology. 2024;75:921-7.
78.
PirruccelloJPChaffinMDChouEL, et al. Deep learning enables genetic analysis of the human thoracic aorta. Nat Genet. 2022;54:40-51.
79.
LiJPanCZhangS, et al. Decoding the genomics of abdominal aortic aneurysm. Cell. 2018;174:1361-72.e10.
80.
LambertiMJWilkinsonMDonzantiBA, et al. A study on the application and use of artificial intelligence to support drug development. Clin Ther. 2019;41:1414-26.
81.
LeeCSLeeAY.How artificial intelligence can transform randomized controlled trials. Transl Vis Sci Technol. 2020;9:9.
82.
LareyreFNasrBChaudhuriADi LorenzoGCarlierMRaffortJ.Comprehensive review of Natural Language Processing (NLP) in vascular surgery. EJVES Vasc Forum. 2023;60:57-63.
83.
RoumengasRDi LorenzoGSalhiA, et al. Natural language processing for literature search in vascular surgery: a pilot study testing an artificial intelligence based application. EJVES Vasc Forum. 2023;60:48-52.
84.
MelissanoGTinelliGSoderlundT.Current artificial intelligence based chatbots may produce inaccurate and potentially harmful information for patients with aortic disease. Eur J Vasc Endovasc Surg. 2024;67:683-4.
85.
LareyreFPoggiERaffortJ.Moving forward: evaluation of artificial intelligence chatbots in vascular diseases. Eur J Vasc Endovasc Surg. 2024;67:691.
86.
BanerjeeDSinghPAvadhanamASrivastavaS.Benchmarking LLM powered chatbots: methods and metrics. arXiv:2308.04624; 2023.
87.
SinghalKAziziSTuT, et al. Large language models encode clinical knowledge. Nature. 2023;620:172-80.
88.
LareyreFAdamCCarrierMChakfeNRaffortJ.Artificial intelligence for education of vascular surgeons. Eur J Vasc Endovasc Surg. 2020;59:870-1.
89.
LiBde MestralCMamdaniMAl-OmranM.Perceptions of Canadian vascular surgeons toward artificial intelligence and machine learning. J Vasc Surg Cases Innov Tech. 2022;8:466-72.
90.
HarrerS.Attention is not all you need: the complicated case of ethically using large language models in healthcare and medicine. EBioMedicine. 2023;90:104512.
91.
KellyCJKarthikesalingamASuleymanMCorradoGKingD.Key challenges for delivering clinical impact with artificial intelligence. BMC Med. 2019;17:195.
92.
LareyreFBehrendtCAChaudhuriAAyacheNDelingetteHRaffortJ.Big data and artificial intelligence in vascular surgery: time for multidisciplinary cross-border collaboration. Angiology. 2022;73:697-700.
93.
ReinkeATizabiMDBaumgartnerM, et al. Understanding metric-related pitfalls in image analysis validation. arXiv:2302.01790; 2023.
94.
LareyreFWanhainenARaffortJ. Artificial intelligence-powered technologies for the management of vascular diseases: building guidelines and moving forward evidence generation. J Endovasc Ther. Epub 2023 Jul 19. doi:10.1177/15266028231187599
LareyreFMareschMChaudhuriARaffortJ.Ethics and legal framework for trustworthy artificial intelligence in vascular surgery. EJVES Vasc Forum. 2023;60:42-4.
102.
StahlBC.Embedding responsibility in intelligent systems: from AI ethics to responsible AI ecosystems. Sci Rep. 2023;13:7586.
