Pulmonary Embolism Risk Stratification from CTPA and Medical Records: Vascular Graphs Are Not All You Need
Not on the map. Why?
Abstract (arXiv)
Risk stratification for pulmonary embolism (PE) is critical for clinical decision-making. Stratification guidelines are based on patient medical records, parameters measured from computed tomography pulmonary angiography (CTPA), and blood tests. However, blood tests are often missing in routine practice. This work studies whether state-of-the-art models can accurately classify risk stratification from only medical records and biomarkers extracted from CTPA images. We benchmark different approaches to combine medical records and cardiac biomarkers with rich pulmonary vascular information; we add vascular biomarkers to tabular models and apply graph neural networks (GNNs) on the vascular tree's intrinsic graph representation. We use a private dataset (n=353) with uniquely complete data for PE risk stratification. Our results show that, among global features, medical records and cardiac biomarkers are the most significant predictors, while vascular biomarkers do not further improve stratification. Even more surprising, even GNNs on vascular graphs fail to outperform strong tabular baseline on global features. We consider hypotheses, on both models and data, that could explain this suboptimal performance. Our investigation suggests that, counter-intuitively, vascular graphs might hold no discriminative information for PE risk stratification. Code is available from https://github.com/creatis-myriad/GENESIS.
Key facts. No citing papers in the map yet (data through 14 Oct 2026). Builds on 21 of its 35 references that are in the map. First posted on arXiv 24 Jun 2026.
Builds on
21 of 35 references.
References · 21
- 2016Semi-Supervised Classification with Graph Convolutional Networkscited by 11,361
- 2016XGBoost: A Scalable Tree Boosting Systemcited by 5,166
- 2018How Powerful are Graph Neural Networks?cited by 4,393
- 2019Optuna: A Next-generation Hyperparameter Optimization Frameworkcited by 2,501
- 2020Open Graph Benchmark: Datasets for Machine Learning on Graphscited by 2,163
- 2021How Attentive are Graph Attention Networks?cited by 835
- 2021Revisiting Deep Learning Models for Tabular Datacited by 740
- 2022Recipe for a General, Powerful, Scalable Graph Transformercited by 713
- 2020Benchmarking Graph Neural Networkscited by 680
- 2022TotalSegmentator: robust segmentation of 104 anatomical structures in CT imagescited by 613
- 2022Multimodal Learning with Transformers: A Surveycited by 400
- 2023Graph Foundation Models: Concepts, Opportunities and Challengescited by 103
9 more
- 2021Graph-Based Deep Learning for Medical Diagnosis and Analysis: Past, Present and Futurecited by 67
- 2024A Comprehensive Survey of Foundation Models in Medicinecited by 56
- 2025PyG 2.0: Scalable Learning on Real World Graphscited by 52
- 2017Graph Classification via Deep Learning with Virtual Nodescited by 30
- 2023Efficient automatic segmentation for multi-level pulmonary arteries: The PARSE challengecited by 28
- 2024A Systematic Review of Intermediate Fusion in Multimodal Deep Learning for Biomedical Applicationscited by 25
- 2024Deep learning-driven pulmonary artery and vein segmentation reveals demography-associated vasculature anatomical differencescited by 9
- 2025DAFTED: Decoupled Asymmetric Fusion of Tabular and Echocardiographic Data for Cardiac Hypertension Diagnosiscited by 1
- 2026A Patient-Specific Pulmonary Arterial Tree Digital Twin to Extract Pulmonary Embolism Biomarkerscited by 1
Built on by
Not cited yet.