Clinical imaging · 2021
Evaluation of computer-aided diagnosis in breast ultrasonography: Improvement in diagnostic performance of inexperienced radiologists.
СтатьяНазвание и аннотация: Перевод пока не подготовлен
Обработка статьи · этапы, ошибки и управление
Загрузка состояния…
Ошибки и ограничения
История · было → стало
Состояние обновляется каждые 5 секунд, пока блок открыт. Процент показывается только там, где известен объём работы. Пауза останавливает продолжение этапа; текущий запрос к источнику может завершиться.
Nicosia Luca, Addante Francesca, Bozzini Anna Carla, Latronico Antuono, Montesano Marta, Meneghetti Lorenza, Tettamanzi Francesca, Frassoni Samuele, Bagnardi Vincenzo, De Santis Rossella, Pesapane Filippo, Fodor Cristiana Iuliana, Mastropasqua Mauro Giuseppe, Cassano Enrico
Аннотация
PURPOSE: To evaluate if a computer-aided diagnosis (CAD) system on ultrasound (US) can improve the diagnostic performance of inexperienced radiologists.
METHODS: We collected ultrasound images of 256 breast lesions taken between March and May 2020. We asked two experienced and two inexperienced radiologists to retrospectively review the US features of each breast lesion according to the Breast Imaging Reporting and Data System (BI-RADS) categories. A CAD examination with S-Detect™ software (Samsung Healthcare, Seoul, South Korea) was conducted retrospectively by another uninvolved radiologist blinded to the BIRADS values previously attributed to the lesions. Diagnostic performances of experienced and inexperienced radiologists and CAD were compared and the inter-observer agreement among radiologists was calculated.
RESULTS: The diagnostic performance of the experienced group in terms of sensitivity was significantly higher than CAD (p < 0.001). Conversely, the diagnostic performance of inexperienced group in terms of both sensitivity and specificity was significantly lower than CAD (p < 0.001). We obtained an excellent agreement in the evaluation of the lesions among the two expert radiologists (Kappa coefficient: 88.7%), and among the two non-expert radiologists (Kappa coefficient: 84.9%).
CONCLUSION: The US CAD system is a useful additional tool to improve the diagnostic performance of the inexperienced radiologists, eventually reducing the number of unnecessary biopsies. Moreover, it is a valid second opinion in case of experienced radiologists.
METHODS: We collected ultrasound images of 256 breast lesions taken between March and May 2020. We asked two experienced and two inexperienced radiologists to retrospectively review the US features of each breast lesion according to the Breast Imaging Reporting and Data System (BI-RADS) categories. A CAD examination with S-Detect™ software (Samsung Healthcare, Seoul, South Korea) was conducted retrospectively by another uninvolved radiologist blinded to the BIRADS values previously attributed to the lesions. Diagnostic performances of experienced and inexperienced radiologists and CAD were compared and the inter-observer agreement among radiologists was calculated.
RESULTS: The diagnostic performance of the experienced group in terms of sensitivity was significantly higher than CAD (p < 0.001). Conversely, the diagnostic performance of inexperienced group in terms of both sensitivity and specificity was significantly lower than CAD (p < 0.001). We obtained an excellent agreement in the evaluation of the lesions among the two expert radiologists (Kappa coefficient: 88.7%), and among the two non-expert radiologists (Kappa coefficient: 84.9%).
CONCLUSION: The US CAD system is a useful additional tool to improve the diagnostic performance of the inexperienced radiologists, eventually reducing the number of unnecessary biopsies. Moreover, it is a valid second opinion in case of experienced radiologists.