Literature DB >> 18982331

Does a computer-aided detection algorithm in a second read paradigm enhance the performance of experienced computed tomography colonography readers in a population of increased risk?

Ayso H de Vries1, Sebastiaan Jensch, Marjolein H Liedenbaum, Jasper Florie, Chung Y Nio, Roel Truyen, Shandra Bipat, Evelien Dekker, Paul Fockens, Lubbertus C Baak, Jaap Stoker.   

Abstract

We prospectively determined whether computer-aided detection (CAD) could improve the performance characteristics of computed tomography colonography (CTC) in a population of increased risk for colorectal cancer. Therefore, we included 170 consecutive patients that underwent both CTC and colonoscopy. All findings >or=6 mm were evaluated at colonoscopy by segmental unblinding. We determined per-patient sensitivity and specificity for polyps >or=6 mm and >or=10 mm without and with computer-aided detection (CAD). The McNemar test was used for comparison the results without and with CAD. Unblinded colonoscopy detected 50 patients with lesions >or=6 mm and 25 patients with lesions >or=10 mm. Sensitivity of CTC without CAD for these size categories was 80% (40/50, 95% CI: 69-81%) and 64% (16/25, 95% CI: 45-83%), respectively. CTC with CAD detected one additional patient with a lesion >or=6 mm and two with a lesion >or=10 mm, resulting in a sensitivity of 82% (41/50, 95% CI: 71-93%) (p = 0.50) and 72% (18/25, 95% CI: 54-90%) (p = 1.0), respectively. Specificity without CAD for polyps >or=6 mm and >or=10 mm was 84% (101/120, 95% CI: 78-91%) and 94% (136/145, 95% CI: 90-98%), respectively. With CAD, the specificity remained (nearly) unchanged: 83% (99/120, 95% CI: 76-89%) and 94% (136/145, 95% CI: 90-98%), respectively. Thus, although CTC with CAD detected a few more patients than CTC without CAD, it had no statistically significant positive influence on CTC performance.

Entities:  

Mesh:

Year:  2008        PMID: 18982331     DOI: 10.1007/s00330-008-1215-3

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Eur Radiol        ISSN: 0938-7994            Impact factor:   5.315


  25 in total

1.  Computed tomographic virtual colonoscopy to screen for colorectal neoplasia in asymptomatic adults.

Authors:  Perry J Pickhardt; J Richard Choi; Inku Hwang; James A Butler; Michael L Puckett; Hans A Hildebrandt; Roy K Wong; Pamela A Nugent; Pauline A Mysliwiec; William R Schindler
Journal:  N Engl J Med       Date:  2003-12-01       Impact factor: 91.245

Review 2.  The Paris endoscopic classification of superficial neoplastic lesions: esophagus, stomach, and colon: November 30 to December 1, 2002.

Authors: 
Journal:  Gastrointest Endosc       Date:  2003-12       Impact factor: 9.427

3.  Computer-assisted detection of colonic polyps with CT colonography using neural networks and binary classification trees.

Authors:  Anna K Jerebko; Ronald M Summers; James D Malley; Marek Franaszek; C Daniel Johnson
Journal:  Med Phys       Date:  2003-01       Impact factor: 4.071

4.  Three-dimensional display modes for CT colonography: conventional 3D virtual colonoscopy versus unfolded cube projection.

Authors:  Frans M Vos; Rogier E van Gelder; Iwo W O Serlie; Jasper Florie; C Yung Nio; Afina S Glas; Frits H Post; Roel Truyen; Frans A Gerritsen; Jaap Stoker
Journal:  Radiology       Date:  2003-09       Impact factor: 11.105

5.  Computed tomography colonography: feasibility of computer-aided polyp detection in a "first reader" paradigm.

Authors:  Aravind Mani; Sandy Napel; David S Paik; R Brooke Jeffrey; Judy Yee; Eric W Olcott; Rupert Prokesch; Marta Davila; Pamela Schraedley-Desmond; Christopher F Beaulieu
Journal:  J Comput Assist Tomogr       Date:  2004 May-Jun       Impact factor: 1.826

6.  A comparison of primary two- and three-dimensional methods to review CT colonography.

Authors:  Rogier E van Gelder; Jasper Florie; C Yung Nio; Sebastiaan Jensch; Steven W de Jager; Frans M Vos; Henk W Venema; Joep F Bartelsman; Johannes B Reitsma; Patrick M M Bossuyt; Johan S Laméris; Jaap Stoker
Journal:  Eur Radiol       Date:  2006-11-22       Impact factor: 5.315

7.  Computed tomographic virtual colonoscopy computer-aided polyp detection in a screening population.

Authors:  Ronald M Summers; Jianhua Yao; Perry J Pickhardt; Marek Franaszek; Ingmar Bitter; Daniel Brickman; Vamsi Krishna; J Richard Choi
Journal:  Gastroenterology       Date:  2005-12       Impact factor: 22.682

8.  Is in vivo measurement of size of polyps during colonoscopy accurate?

Authors:  N Gopalswamy; V N Shenoy; U Choudhry; R J Markert; N Peace; M S Bhutani; C J Barde
Journal:  Gastrointest Endosc       Date:  1997-12       Impact factor: 9.427

9.  Computer-aided detection of colorectal polyps: can it improve sensitivity of less-experienced readers? Preliminary findings.

Authors:  Mark E Baker; Luca Bogoni; Nancy A Obuchowski; Chandra Dass; Renee M Kendzierski; Erick M Remer; David M Einstein; Pascal Cathier; Anna Jerebko; Sarang Lakare; Andrew Blum; Dina F Caroline; Michael Macari
Journal:  Radiology       Date:  2007-10       Impact factor: 11.105

10.  Characterization of lesions missed on interpretation of CT colonography using a 2D search method.

Authors:  Thomas M Gluecker; J G Fletcher; Timothy J Welch; Robert L MacCarty; William S Harmsen; Jeffrey R Harrington; Duane Ilstrup; Lynn A Wilson; Kay E Corcoran; C Daniel Johnson
Journal:  AJR Am J Roentgenol       Date:  2004-04       Impact factor: 3.959

View more
  10 in total

Review 1.  Improving the accuracy of CTC interpretation: computer-aided detection.

Authors:  Ronald M Summers
Journal:  Gastrointest Endosc Clin N Am       Date:  2010-04

2.  CT colonography: advanced computer-aided detection scheme utilizing MTANNs for detection of "missed" polyps in a multicenter clinical trial.

Authors:  Kenji Suzuki; Don C Rockey; Abraham H Dachman
Journal:  Med Phys       Date:  2010-01       Impact factor: 4.071

3.  ACRIN CT colonography trial: does reader's preference for primary two-dimensional versus primary three-dimensional interpretation affect performance?

Authors:  Amy K Hara; Meridith Blevins; Mei-Hsiu Chen; Abraham H Dachman; Mark D Kuo; Christine O Menias; Bettina Siewert; Jugesh I Cheema; Richard G Obregon; Jeff L Fidler; Peter Zimmerman; Karen M Horton; Kevin J Coakley; Revathy B Iyer; Robert A Halvorsen; Giovanna Casola; Judy Yee; Benjamin A Herman; C Daniel Johnson
Journal:  Radiology       Date:  2011-03-01       Impact factor: 11.105

4.  CT colonography: effect of computer-aided detection of colonic polyps as a second and concurrent reader for general radiologists with moderate experience in CT colonography.

Authors:  Thomas Mang; Luca Bogoni; Vikram X Anand; Dass Chandra; Andrew J Curtin; Anna S Lev-Toaff; Gerardo Hermosillo; Ralph Noah; Vikas Raykar; Marcos Salganicoff; Robert Shaw; Susan Summerton; Rafel F R Tappouni; Helmut Ringel; Michael Weber; Matthias Wolf; Nancy A Obuchowski
Journal:  Eur Radiol       Date:  2014-05-10       Impact factor: 5.315

5.  Comparative performance of a primary-reader and second-reader paradigm of computer-aided detection for CT colonography in a low-prevalence screening population.

Authors:  Mototaka Miyake; Gen Iinuma; Stuart A Taylor; Steve Halligan; Tsuyoshi Morimoto; Tamaki Ichikawa; Hideto Tomimatsu; Gareth Beddoe; Kazuro Sugimura; Yasuaki Arai
Journal:  Jpn J Radiol       Date:  2013-02-19       Impact factor: 2.374

6.  Automated computer-aided stenosis detection at coronary CT angiography: initial experience.

Authors:  Elisabeth Arnoldi; Mulugeta Gebregziabher; U Joseph Schoepf; Roman Goldenberg; Luis Ramos-Duran; Peter L Zwerner; Konstantin Nikolaou; Maximilian F Reiser; Philip Costello; Christian Thilo
Journal:  Eur Radiol       Date:  2009-11-05       Impact factor: 5.315

7.  Probabilistic method for context-sensitive detection of polyps in CT colonography.

Authors:  Janne J Näppi; Daniele Regge; Hiroyuki Yoshida
Journal:  Proc SPIE Int Soc Opt Eng       Date:  2011-03-04

8.  Haustral fold segmentation with curvature-guided level set evolution.

Authors:  Hongbin Zhu; Matthew Barish; Perry Pickhardt; Zhengrong Liang
Journal:  IEEE Trans Biomed Eng       Date:  2012-10-26       Impact factor: 4.538

9.  Polyp measurement based on CT colonography and colonoscopy: variability and systematic differences.

Authors:  Ayso H de Vries; Shandra Bipat; Evelien Dekker; Marjolein H Liedenbaum; Jasper Florie; Paul Fockens; Roel van der Kraan; Elizabeth M Mathus-Vliegen; Johannes B Reitsma; Roel Truyen; Frans M Vos; Aeilko H Zwinderman; Jaap Stoker
Journal:  Eur Radiol       Date:  2009-12-22       Impact factor: 5.315

10.  The second ESGAR consensus statement on CT colonography.

Authors:  Emanuele Neri; Steve Halligan; Mikael Hellström; Philippe Lefere; Thomas Mang; Daniele Regge; Jaap Stoker; Stuart Taylor; Andrea Laghi
Journal:  Eur Radiol       Date:  2012-09-15       Impact factor: 5.315

  10 in total

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.