Computer-aided detection of colorectal polyps: Can it improve sensitivity of less-experienced readers? Preliminary findings
Computer-aided detection of colorectal polyps: Can it improve sensitivity of less-experienced readers? Preliminary findings
复制标题
DOI：
10.1148/radiol.2451061116
复制
发表时间：
2007-10-01
期刊：
影响因子：
19.7
通讯作者：
Macari, Michael
中科院分区：
文献类型：
--
作者：
Baker, Mark E.;Bogoni, Luca;Macari, Michael
目的：为了确定计算机辅助检测（CAD）应用于计算机断层扫描（CT）结肠成像是否可以帮助提高敏感性息肉检测经验不足的放射科医师的读者，结肠镜检查或共识作为referencesstandard.Materials和方法：释放的CT结肠成像研究批准的个别机构审查委员会的每个机构。来自美国的机构符合《健康保险和责任法案》。所有机构均放弃书面知情同意。收集了来自6个机构的30例患者的CT结肠成像研究; 24张图像显示至少有一个6 mm或更大的息肉（39个总息肉），6张图像显示无息肉。通过使用研究软件包，来自两家机构的7名经验不足的读者评估了CT结肠成像图像，并在CAD前后使用五点量表对息肉进行标记或评分。记录解释无CAD的CT结肠造影结果以及在有CAD的情况下重新评估所需的时间。对于每个读者，McNemar测试，调整聚类数据，被用来比较灵敏度的读者没有和CAD;一个Wilcoxon符号秩检验被用来分析每patient.Results的假阳性结果的数量：息肉检测的平均灵敏度的7个读者与CAD显着提高，从0.810到0.908（P = 0.0152）。每例无CAD和有CAD患者的假阳性结果数从0.70增加到0.96（增加的95%置信区间：-0.39，0.91）。读数的平均总时间为17分54秒;单独的CT结肠造影结果的解释，平均时间为14分16秒;和审查或CAD的结果，平均时间为3分38秒。结论：这项可行性研究的结果表明，CAD CT结肠造影显着提高了经验不足的读者每息肉检测。
Purpose: To determine whether computer-aided detection (CAD) applied to computed tomographic (CT) colonography can help improve sensitivity of polyp detection by less-experienced radiologist readers, with colonoscopy or consensus used as the reference standard.Materials and Methods: The release of the CT colonographic studies was approved by the individual institutional review boards of each institution. Institutions from the United States were HIPAA compliant. Written informed consent was waived at all institutions. The CT colonographic studies in 30 patients from six institutions were collected; 24 images depicted at least one confirmed polyp 6 mm or larger (39 total polyps) and six depicted no polys. By using an investigational software package, seven less-experienced readers from two institutions evaluated the CT colonographic images and marked or scored polyps by using a five-point scale before and after CAD. The time needed to interpret the CT colonographic findings without CAD and then to reevaluate them with CAD was recorded. For each reader, the McNemar test, adjusted for clustered data, was used to compare sensitivities for readers without and with CAD; a Wilcoxon signed-rank test was used to analyze the number of false-positive results per patient.Results: The average sensitivity of the seven readers for polyp detection was significantly improved with CAD-from 0.810 to 0.908 (P = .0152). The number of false-positive results per patient without and with CAD increased from 0.70 to 0.96 (95% confidence interval for the increase: -0.39, 0.91). The mean total time for the readings was 17 minutes 54 seconds; for interpretation of CT colonographic findings alone, the mean time was 14 minutes 16 seconds; and for review or CAD findings, the mean time was 3 minutes 38 seconds.Conclusion: Results of this feasibility study suggest that CAD for CT colonography significantly improves per-polyp detection for less-experienced readers.