Not provided
Not provided
Not provided
Not provided
Not provided
Not provided
Not provided
Not provided
Not provided
Not provided
Not provided
Not provided
Not provided
Not provided
Not provided
Not provided
Not provided
Not provided
Not provided
Not provided
Ultrasound data were both retrospectively and prospectively collected from the primary center and six other sub-centers. Combined with clinical diagnostic outcomes, the data labeling was completed by physicians with extensive clinical experience. In this study, ConvNeXtV2 was used as the classification network and YOLOv12 was adopted as the detection network.The retrospective dataset from the primary center was split into training, validation, and test subsets, on which the model was trained, validated, and tested respectively; additional validation was conducted on both retrospective and prospective datasets from the primary center and sub-centers.Meanwhile, four physicians were assigned to interpret the ultrasound data from the retrospective and prospective datasets from the primary center and sub-centers using two diagnostic methods-independent diagnosis and artificial intelligence (AI)-assisted diagnosis-and the diagnostic accuracy of these two approaches was further compared.By collecting and learning the treatment methods of patients in the primary center training set, predicting the treatment methods of patients in the sub-center datasets, and comparing the proportion of surgeries predicted by AI with the actual proportion of surgeries, the efficacy of the model was verified.
Ultrasound data were both retrospectively and prospectively collected from the primary center and six other sub-centers. Combined with clinical diagnostic outcomes, the data labeling was completed by physicians with extensive clinical experience. In this study, ConvNeXtV2 was used as the classification network and YOLOv12 was adopted as the detection network.The retrospective dataset from the primary center was split into training, validation, and test subsets, on which the model was trained, validated, and tested respectively; additional validation was conducted on both retrospective and prospective datasets from the primary center and sub-centers.Meanwhile, four physicians were assigned to interpret the ultrasound data from the retrospective and prospective datasets from the primary center and sub-centers using two diagnostic methods-independent diagnosis and artificial intelligence (AI)-assisted diagnosis-and the diagnostic accuracy of these two approaches was further compared.By collecting and learning the treatment methods of patients in the primary center training set, predicting the treatment methods of patients in the sub-center datasets, and comparing the proportion of surgeries predicted by AI with the actual proportion of surgeries, the efficacy of the model was verified.
Not provided
Not provided
Not provided
Not provided
| Label | Type | Description | Intervention Names |
|---|---|---|---|
| Testicular Appendix Torsion Group | Patients diagnosed with testicular appendage torsion | ||
| Testicular Torsion Group | Patients diagnosed with testicular torsion | ||
| Epididymitis Group | Patients diagnosed with epididymitis | ||
| Normal Group | Patients with no testicular appendage torsion,testicular torsion,epididymitis,and the scrotum is normal |
Not provided
| Measure | Description | Time Frame |
|---|---|---|
| Accuracy of deep-learning model verify four conditions:testicular appendage torsion;testicular torsion;epididymitis and normal condition | accuracy of deep-learning model verify four conditions:testicular appendage torsion;testicular torsion;epididymitis and normal condition | From image input to result generation is expected to be 24 hours |
| Measure | Description | Time Frame |
|---|---|---|
| Number of Participants with Acute Scrotal Pain | From enrollment begin to the end is expected to be 5 months | |
| The accuracy rate of clinicians in diagnosing and localizing testicular appendix torsion | From the begin of Clinicians diagnose and locate to the end is expected to be 15 days |
Not provided
Inclusion Criteria:
Exclusion Criteria:
Biological male
Age ≤ 18 years old,underwent ultrasound examination due to acute scrotal pain (≤ 24 hours)
| Name | Role | Phone | Extension | |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Ying Jiang, Master Degree | Contact | 86-19883203100 | Jiang_ying@zju.edu.cn | |
| Juntao Jiang, Master Degree | Contact | 86-13968107281 | juntaojiang@zju.edu.cn |
| Name | Affiliation | Role |
|---|---|---|
| Jingjing Ye, Phd Degree | The Children's Hospital of Zhejiang University School of Medicine | Study Director |
| Facility | Status | City | State | ZIP | Country | Contacts |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Children's Hospital of Zhejiang University School of Medicine | Hangzhou | Zhejiang | 310000 | China |
the patient's ultrasound images and baseline data
The IPD and supporting information will be available at 1st Jan,2027, and for one month
Journal editors and reviewers,study protocol,send me email to access it.
Not provided
Not provided
| ID | Term |
|---|---|
| D013086 | Spermatic Cord Torsion |
| D004823 | Epididymitis |
| ID | Term |
|---|---|
| D005832 | Genital Diseases, Male |
| D000091662 | Genital Diseases |
| D000091642 | Urogenital Diseases |
| D052801 | Male Urogenital Diseases |
Not provided
Not provided
Not provided
Not provided
Not provided
| The accuracy rate of the Deep learning model in predicting the treatment modality for testicular appendix torsion,conservative treatment or surgery | From the begin of the prediction of treatment for testicular appendix torsion by Deep learning model to the end is expected to be 24 hours |