PURPOSE: To design and validate a computer system for automated detection and quantitative characterization of sclerotic metastases of the thoracolumbar spine on computed tomography (CT) images. MATERIALS AND METHODS: This retrospective study was approved by the institutional review board and was HIPAA compliant; informed consent was waived. The data set consisted of CT examinations in 49 patients (14 female, 35 male patients; mean age, 57.0 years; range, 12-77 years), demonstrating a total of 532 sclerotic lesions of the spine of greater than 0.3 cm(3) in volume, and in 10 control case patients (four women, six men; mean age, 55.2 years; range, 19-70 years) without spinal lesions. CT examinations were divided into training and test sets, and images were analyzed according to prototypical fully-automated computer-aided detection (CAD) software. Free-response receiver operating characteristic analysis was performed. RESULTS: Lesion detection sensitivity on images in the training set was 90%, relative to reference-standard marked lesions (95% confidence interval [CI]: 83%, 97%), at a false-positive rate (FPR) of 10.8 per patient (95% CI: 6.6, 15.0). For images in the testing set, sensitivity was 79% (95% CI: 74%, 84%), with an FPR of 10.9 per patient (95% CI: 8.5, 13.3). False-negative findings were most commonly (37 [40%] of 93) a result of endplate proximity, with 32 (34% of 93) caused by low CT attenuation. Marginal sclerosis caused by degenerative change (174 [28.1%] of 620 actual detections) was the most common cause of false-positive detections, followed by partial volume averaging with vertebral endplates (173 [27.9%] of 620) and pedicle cortex parallel to the axial imaging plane (121 [19.5%] 620). CONCLUSION: This CAD system successfully identified and segmented sclerotic lesions in the thoracolumbar spine.
PURPOSE: To design and validate a computer system for automated detection and quantitative characterization of sclerotic metastases of the thoracolumbar spine on computed tomography (CT) images. MATERIALS AND METHODS: This retrospective study was approved by the institutional review board and was HIPAA compliant; informed consent was waived. The data set consisted of CT examinations in 49 patients (14 female, 35 male patients; mean age, 57.0 years; range, 12-77 years), demonstrating a total of 532 sclerotic lesions of the spine of greater than 0.3 cm(3) in volume, and in 10 control case patients (four women, six men; mean age, 55.2 years; range, 19-70 years) without spinal lesions. CT examinations were divided into training and test sets, and images were analyzed according to prototypical fully-automated computer-aided detection (CAD) software. Free-response receiver operating characteristic analysis was performed. RESULTS: Lesion detection sensitivity on images in the training set was 90%, relative to reference-standard marked lesions (95% confidence interval [CI]: 83%, 97%), at a false-positive rate (FPR) of 10.8 per patient (95% CI: 6.6, 15.0). For images in the testing set, sensitivity was 79% (95% CI: 74%, 84%), with an FPR of 10.9 per patient (95% CI: 8.5, 13.3). False-negative findings were most commonly (37 [40%] of 93) a result of endplate proximity, with 32 (34% of 93) caused by low CT attenuation. Marginal sclerosis caused by degenerative change (174 [28.1%] of 620 actual detections) was the most common cause of false-positive detections, followed by partial volume averaging with vertebral endplates (173 [27.9%] of 620) and pedicle cortex parallel to the axial imaging plane (121 [19.5%] 620). CONCLUSION: This CAD system successfully identified and segmented sclerotic lesions in the thoracolumbar spine.
Authors: Ted Way; Heang-Ping Chan; Lubomir Hadjiiski; Berkman Sahiner; Aamer Chughtai; Thomas K Song; Chad Poopat; Jadranka Stojanovska; Luba Frank; Anil Attili; Naama Bogot; Philip N Cascade; Ella A Kazerooni Journal: Acad Radiol Date: 2010-03 Impact factor: 3.173
Authors: Abraham H Dachman; Nancy A Obuchowski; Jeffrey W Hoffmeister; J Louis Hinshaw; Michael I Frew; Thomas C Winter; Robert L Van Uitert; Senthil Periaswamy; Ronald M Summers; Bruce J Hillman Journal: Radiology Date: 2010-07-27 Impact factor: 11.105
Authors: Berkman Sahiner; Heang-Ping Chan; Lubomir M Hadjiiski; Philip N Cascade; Ella A Kazerooni; Aamer R Chughtai; Chad Poopat; Thomas Song; Luba Frank; Jadranka Stojanovska; Anil Attili Journal: Acad Radiol Date: 2009-12 Impact factor: 3.173
Authors: Mohsen Beheshti; Reza Vali; Peter Waldenberger; Friedrich Fitz; Michael Nader; Josef Hammer; Wolfgang Loidl; Christian Pirich; Ignac Fogelman; Werner Langsteger Journal: Mol Imaging Biol Date: 2009-07-09 Impact factor: 3.488
Authors: Holger R Roth; Le Lu; Jiamin Liu; Jianhua Yao; Ari Seff; Kevin Cherry; Lauren Kim; Ronald M Summers Journal: IEEE Trans Med Imaging Date: 2015-09-28 Impact factor: 10.048