Literature DB >> 15186887

Are unnecessary follow-up procedures induced by computer-aided diagnosis (CAD) in mammography? Comparison of mammographic diagnosis with and without use of CAD.

Christiane Marx1, Ansgar Malich, Mirjam Facius, Uta Grebenstein, Dieter Sauner, Stefan O R Pfleiderer, Werner A Kaiser.   

Abstract

OBJECTIVE: To evaluate the rate of unnecessary follow-up procedures recommended by radiologists using a CAD-system.
MATERIALS AND METHODS: 185 patients (740 images) were consecutively selected from three groups (36 histologically proven cancers = group 1; 49 histologically proven benign lesions = group 2 and 100 screening cases (4 years-follow up = group 3). Mammograms were evaluated by a CAD system (Second Look, CADx, Canada). Five blinded radiologists assessed the images without/with CAD outputs. Diagnostic decisions were ranked from surely benign to surely malignant according to BIRADS classification, follow-up procedures were recommended for each observed lesion (a, screening; b, short interval follow-up examination in 6 months; c, pathologic clarification).
RESULTS: CAD-system detected 32/36 cancers (88.9%) (FP-rate: 1.04 massmarks and 0.27 calcmarks/image). The following values were reached by all observers without/with CAD in the mean: Sensitivity 80.6/80.0%, specificity 83.2/86.4%, PPV 53.1/58.1%, and NPV 94.6/94.7%. Observers described a similar number of additional lesions without/with the use of CAD (325/326). Whereas the number of unnecessary short-time follow up recommendations increased in all case-subgroups with CAD: 40.8/42.9% (group 1), 35.6/38.1% (group 2), 44.7/46.8% (group 3), respectively, the number of recommended biopsies decreased in all subgroups: group 1: 34.7/27.1%; group 2: 47.4/41.5%, group 3: 33.3/22.0%, respectively.
CONCLUSION: In this rather small population additional usage of CAD led to a lower rate of unnecessary biopsies. The observed decrease of recommended unnecessary biopsies due to the usage of CAD in the screening group suggests a potential financial benefit by using CAD as diagnostic aid.

Entities:  

Mesh:

Year:  2004        PMID: 15186887     DOI: 10.1016/S0720-048X(03)00144-X

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Eur J Radiol        ISSN: 0720-048X            Impact factor:   3.528


  6 in total

Review 1.  CAD for mammography: the technique, results, current role and further developments.

Authors:  Ansgar Malich; Dorothee R Fischer; Joachim Böttcher
Journal:  Eur Radiol       Date:  2006-01-17       Impact factor: 5.315

2.  Effect of breast density on computer aided detection.

Authors:  Ansgar Malich; Dorothee R Fischer; Mirjam Facius; Alexander Petrovitch; Joachim Boettcher; Christiane Marx; Andreas Hansch; Werner A Kaiser
Journal:  J Digit Imaging       Date:  2005-09       Impact factor: 4.056

Review 3.  Advances in computer-aided diagnosis for breast cancer.

Authors:  Lubomir Hadjiiski; Berkman Sahiner; Heang-Ping Chan
Journal:  Curr Opin Obstet Gynecol       Date:  2006-02       Impact factor: 1.927

Review 4.  Methods Used in Computer-Aided Diagnosis for Breast Cancer Detection Using Mammograms: A Review.

Authors:  Saleem Z Ramadan
Journal:  J Healthc Eng       Date:  2020-03-12       Impact factor: 2.682

Review 5.  Automation bias and verification complexity: a systematic review.

Authors:  David Lyell; Enrico Coiera
Journal:  J Am Med Inform Assoc       Date:  2017-03-01       Impact factor: 4.497

Review 6.  Foundation and methodologies in computer-aided diagnosis systems for breast cancer detection.

Authors:  Afsaneh Jalalian; Syamsiah Mashohor; Rozi Mahmud; Babak Karasfi; M Iqbal B Saripan; Abdul Rahman B Ramli
Journal:  EXCLI J       Date:  2017-02-20       Impact factor: 4.068

  6 in total

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.