Addition of Tomosynthesis to Conventional Digital Mammography: Effect on Image Interpretation Time of Screening Examinations
Addition of Tomosynthesis to Conventional Digital Mammography: Effect on Image Interpretation Time of Screening Examinations
复制标题
DOI：
10.1148/radiol.13130765
复制
发表时间：
2014-01-01
期刊：
影响因子：
19.7
通讯作者：
Rafferty, Elizabeth A.
中科院分区：
文献类型：
--
作者：
Dang, Pragya A.;Freer, Phoebe E.;Rafferty, Elizabeth A.
目的：通过量化大型学术中心中具有广泛经验的多名参与放射科医生的常规筛查乳腺X射线摄影和组合断层合成和乳腺X射线摄影的判读时间之间的差异，确定实施筛查断层合成程序对真实世界临床性能的影响。材料和方法：在这项符合健康保险责任法案、机构审查委员会批准的研究中，10名放射科医生前瞻性地读取了来自筛查数字乳腺X射线摄影或筛查组合断层合成和乳腺X射线摄影检查的图像，持续1小时-长时间不间断的会议。从2012年7月至2013年1月，每名放射科医生每种模式至少在5次会议上解读了3665次检查（1502次合并和2163次数字乳腺X线摄影）的图像。记录了每位阅片人在每次会议期间报告的病例数。每个放射科医生的经验水平也与每小时报告的平均病例数相关。采用方差分析评估每小时解读的研究数量。线性回归模型用于评估乳腺成像经验与解读两种模式图像所需时间之间的相关性。以小时为单位解读的研究平均数量为23.8 +/- 0.55（标准差）（范围，14.4-40.4），单独数字乳腺摄影为34.0 +/- 0.55（范围，20.4-54.3）。与数字化乳腺X射线摄影相比，在断层合成摄影和乳腺X射线摄影组合期间，每小时平均少解读10.2项研究（P < .0001）。X射线断层合成摄影和乳腺X射线摄影组合的平均判读时间为2.8分钟+/- 0.9（范围，1.5-4.2分钟），数字乳腺X射线摄影组合的平均判读时间为1.9分钟+/- 0.6（范围，1.1-3.0）; X射线断层合成摄影和乳腺X射线摄影组合的判读时间比单独的数字乳腺X射线摄影长0.9分钟（长47%）（P < .0001）。随着乳腺成像经验年限的增加，阅读断层合成摄影和乳腺X射线摄影检查联合图像所需的总体额外时间减少（R-2 = 0.52，P = 0.03）。结论：与单独解读传统数字乳腺X射线摄影图像的时间相比，将断层合成摄影添加到乳腺X射线摄影导致解读筛选检查图像的时间增加。(C)RSNA，2014年
Purpose: To determine the effect of implementing a screening tomosynthesis program on real-world clinical performance by quantifying differences between interpretation times for conventional screening mammography and combined tomosynthesis and mammography for multiple participating radiologists with a wide range of experience in a large academic center.Materials and Methods: In this HIPAA-compliant, institutional review board-approved study, 10 radiologists prospectively read images from screening digital mammography or screening combined tomosynthesis and mammography examinations for 1-hour-long uninterrupted sessions. Images from 3665 examinations (1502 combined and 2163 digital mammography) from July 2012 to January 2013 were interpreted in at least five sessions per radiologist per modality. The number of cases reported during each session was recorded for each reader. The experience level for each radiologist was also correlated to the average number of cases reported per hour. Analysis of variance was used to assess the number of studies interpreted per hour. A linear regression model was used to evaluate correlation between breast imaging experience and time taken to interpret images from both modalities.Results: The mean number of studies interpreted in hour was 23.8 +/- 0.55 (standard deviation) (range, 14.4-40.4) for combined tomosynthesis and mammography and 34.0 +/- 0.55 (range, 20.4-54.3) for digital mammography alone. A mean of 10.2 fewer studies were interpreted per hour during combined tomosynthesis and mammography compared with digital mammography sessions (P < .0001). The mean interpretation time was 2.8 minutes +/- 0.9 (range, 1.5-4.2 minutes) for combined tomosynthesis and mammography and 1.9 minutes +/- 0.6 (range, 1.1-3.0) for digital mammography; interpretation time with combined tomosynthesis and mammography was 0.9 minute longer (47% longer) compared with digital mammography alone (P < .0001). With the increase in years of breast imaging experience, the overall additional time required to read images from combined tomosynthesis and mammography examinations decreased (R-2 = 0.52, P = .03).Conclusion: Addition of tomosynthesis to mammography results in increased time to interpret images from screening examinations compared with time to interpret images from conventional digital mammography alone. (C) RSNA, 2014