Literature DB >> 21626930

Comparative performance of multiview stereoscopic and mammographic display modalities for breast lesion detection.

Lincoln J Webb1, Ehsan Samei, Joseph Y Lo, Jay A Baker, Sujata V Ghate, Connie Kim, Mary Scott Soo, Ruth Walsh.   

Abstract

PURPOSE: Mammography is known to be one of the most difficult radiographic exams to interpret. Mammography has important limitations, including the superposition of normal tissue that can obscure a mass, chance alignment of normal tissue to mimic a true lesion and the inability to derive volumetric information. It has been shown that stereomammography can overcome these deficiencies by showing that layers of normal tissue lay at different depths. If standard stereomammography (i.e., a single stereoscopic pair consisting of two projection images) can significantly improve lesion detection, how will multiview stereoscopy (MVS), where many projection images are used, compare to mammography? The aim of this study was to assess the relative performance of MVS compared to mammography for breast mass detection.
METHODS: The MVS image sets consisted of the 25 raw projection images acquired over an arc of approximately 45 degrees using a Siemens prototype breast tomosynthesis system. The mammograms were acquired using a commercial Siemens FFDM system. The raw data were taken from both of these systems for 27 cases and realistic simulated mass lesions were added to duplicates of the 27 images at the same local contrast. The images with lesions (27 mammography and 27 MVS) and the images without lesions (27 mammography and 27 MVS) were then postprocessed to provide comparable and representative image appearance across the two modalities. All 108 image sets were shown to five full-time breast imaging radiologists in random order on a state-of-the-art stereoscopic display. The observers were asked to give a confidence rating for each image (0 for lesion definitely not present, 100 for lesion definitely present). The ratings were then compiled and processed using ROC and variance analysis.
RESULTS: The mean AUC for the five observers was 0.614 +/- 0.055 for mammography and 0.778 +/- 0.052 for multiview stereoscopy. The difference of 0.164 +/- 0.065 was statistically significant with a p-value of 0.0148.
CONCLUSIONS: The differences in the AUCs and the p-value suggest that multiview stereoscopy has a statistically significant advantage over mammography in the detection of simulated breast masses. This highlights the dominance of anatomical noise compared to quantum noise for breast mass detection. It also shows that significant lesion detection can be achieved with MVS without any of the artifacts associated with tomosynthesis.

Entities:  

Mesh:

Year:  2011        PMID: 21626930     DOI: 10.1118/1.3562901

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Med Phys        ISSN: 0094-2405            Impact factor:   4.071


  5 in total

1.  Stereoscopic interpretation of low-dose breast tomosynthesis projection images.

Authors:  Gautam S Muralidhar; Mia K Markey; Alan C Bovik; Tamara Miner Haygood; Tanya W Stephens; William R Geiser; Naveen Garg; Beatriz E Adrada; Basak E Dogan; Selin Carkaci; Raunak Khisty; Gary J Whitman
Journal:  J Digit Imaging       Date:  2014-04       Impact factor: 4.056

2.  Pilot Study on the Detection of Simulated Lesions Using a 2D and 3D Digital Full-Field Mammography System with a Newly Developed High Resolution Detector Based on Two Shifts of a-Se.

Authors:  R Schulz-Wendtland; M Bani; M P Lux; S Schwab; C R Loehberg; S M Jud; C Rauh; C M Bayer; M W Beckmann; M Uder; P A Fasching; B Adamietz; M Meier-Meitinger
Journal:  Geburtshilfe Frauenheilkd       Date:  2012-05       Impact factor: 2.915

3.  Virtual assessment of stereoscopic viewing of digital breast tomosynthesis projection images.

Authors:  Gezheng Wen; Ho-Chang Chang; Jacob Reinhold; Joseph Y Lo; Mia K Markey
Journal:  J Med Imaging (Bellingham)       Date:  2018-01-17

4.  3D Virtual Pancreatography.

Authors:  Shreeraj Jadhav; Konstantin Dmitriev; Joseph Marino; Matthew Barish; Arie E Kaufman
Journal:  IEEE Trans Vis Comput Graph       Date:  2022-01-28       Impact factor: 4.579

Review 5.  Multi-reader multi-case studies using the area under the receiver operator characteristic curve as a measure of diagnostic accuracy: systematic review with a focus on quality of data reporting.

Authors:  Thaworn Dendumrongsup; Andrew A Plumb; Steve Halligan; Thomas R Fanshawe; Douglas G Altman; Susan Mallett
Journal:  PLoS One       Date:  2014-12-26       Impact factor: 3.240

  5 in total

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.