Literature DB >> 32447631

S-Detect characterization of focal solid breast lesions: a prospective analysis of inter-reader agreement for US BI-RADS descriptors.

Tommaso Vincenzo Bartolotta1,2, Alessia Angela Maria Orlando3, Maria Laura Di Vittorio1, Francesco Amato1, Mariangela Dimarco1, Domenica Matranga4, Raffaele Ienzi1.   

Abstract

BACKGROUND: To assess inter-reader agreement for US BI-RADS descriptors using S-Detect: a computer-guided decision-making software assisting in US morphologic analysis.
METHODS: 73 solid focal breast lesions (FBLs) (mean size: 15.9 mm) in 73 consecutive women (mean age: 51 years) detected at US were randomly and independently assessed according to the BI-RADS US lexicon, without and with S-Detect, by five independent reviewers. US-guided core-biopsy and 24-month follow-up were considered as standard of reference. Kappa statistics were calculated to assess inter-operator agreement, between the baseline and after S-Detect evaluation. Agreement was graded as poor (≤ 0.20), moderate (0.21-0.40), fair (0.41-0.60), good (0.61-0.80), or very good (0.81-1.00).
RESULTS: 33/73 (45.2%) FBLs were malignant and 40/73 (54.8%) FBLs were benign. A statistically significant improvement of inter-reader agreement from fair to good with the use of S-Detect was observed for shape (from 0.421 to 0.612) and orientation (from 0.417 to 0.7) (p < 0.0001) and from moderate to fair for margin (from 0.204 to 0.482) and posterior features (from 0.286 to 0.522) (p < 0.0001). At baseline analysis isoechoic (0.0485) and heterogeneous (0.1978) echo pattern, microlobulated (0.1161) angular (0.1204) and spiculated (0.1692) margins and combined pattern (0.1549) for posterior features showed the worst agreement rate (poor). After S-Detect evaluation, all variables but isoechoic pattern showed an agreement class upgrade with a statistically significant improvement of inter-reader agreement (p < 0.0001).
CONCLUSIONS: S-Detect significantly improved inter-reader agreement in the assessment of FBLs according to the BI-RADS US lexicon but evaluation of margin and echo pattern needs to be further improved, particularly isoechoic pattern.

Entities:  

Keywords:  BI-RADS; Breast neoplasms; Computer-assisted diagnosis; Decision-making; Problem-solving; Ultrasonography

Mesh:

Year:  2020        PMID: 32447631      PMCID: PMC8137795          DOI: 10.1007/s40477-020-00476-5

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  J Ultrasound        ISSN: 1876-7931


  26 in total

1.  BI-RADS for sonography: positive and negative predictive values of sonographic features.

Authors:  Andrea S Hong; Eric L Rosen; Mary S Soo; Jay A Baker
Journal:  AJR Am J Roentgenol       Date:  2005-04       Impact factor: 3.959

2.  BI-RADS lexicon for US and mammography: interobserver variability and positive predictive value.

Authors:  Elizabeth Lazarus; Martha B Mainiero; Barbara Schepps; Susan L Koelliker; Linda S Livingston
Journal:  Radiology       Date:  2006-03-28       Impact factor: 11.105

3.  Computer aided classification system for breast ultrasound based on Breast Imaging Reporting and Data System (BI-RADS).

Authors:  Wei-Chih Shen; Ruey-Feng Chang; Woo Kyung Moon
Journal:  Ultrasound Med Biol       Date:  2007-08-03       Impact factor: 2.998

Review 4.  S-Detect characterization of focal breast lesions according to the US BI RADS lexicon: a pictorial essay.

Authors:  Tommaso Vincenzo Bartolotta; Alessia Angela Maria Orlando; Luigi Spatafora; Mariangela Dimarco; Cesare Gagliardo; Adele Taibbi
Journal:  J Ultrasound       Date:  2020-03-17

5.  Focal breast lesion characterization according to the BI-RADS US lexicon: role of a computer-aided decision-making support.

Authors:  Tommaso Vincenzo Bartolotta; Alessia Orlando; Vito Cantisani; Domenica Matranga; Raffele Ienzi; Alessandra Cirino; Francesco Amato; Maria Laura Di Vittorio; Massimo Midiri; Roberto Lagalla
Journal:  Radiol Med       Date:  2018-03-22       Impact factor: 3.469

6.  Automated classification of focal breast lesions according to S-detect: validation and role as a clinical and teaching tool.

Authors:  Mattia Di Segni; Valeria de Soccio; Vito Cantisani; Giacomo Bonito; Antonello Rubini; Gabriele Di Segni; Sveva Lamorte; Valentina Magri; Corrado De Vito; Giuseppe Migliara; Tommaso Vincenzo Bartolotta; Alessio Metere; Laura Giacomelli; Carlo de Felice; Ferdinando D'Ambrosio
Journal:  J Ultrasound       Date:  2018-04-21

7.  Computer-Aided Diagnosis of Solid Breast Lesions With Ultrasound: Factors Associated With False-negative and False-positive Results.

Authors:  Jia-Yi Wu; Zi-Zhuo Zhao; Wen-Yue Zhang; Ming Liang; Bing Ou; Hai-Yun Yang; Bao-Ming Luo
Journal:  J Ultrasound Med       Date:  2019-05-11       Impact factor: 2.153

8.  Interobserver variability of ultrasound elastography and the ultrasound BI-RADS lexicon of breast lesions.

Authors:  Chang Suk Park; Sung Hun Kim; Na Young Jung; Jae Jung Choi; Bong Joo Kang; Hyun Seouk Jung
Journal:  Breast Cancer       Date:  2013-04-13       Impact factor: 4.239

Review 9.  Breast ultrasonography: state of the art.

Authors:  Regina J Hooley; Leslie M Scoutt; Liane E Philpotts
Journal:  Radiology       Date:  2013-09       Impact factor: 11.105

10.  A computer-aided diagnosis system using artificial intelligence for the diagnosis and characterization of breast masses on ultrasound: Added value for the inexperienced breast radiologist.

Authors:  Hee Jeong Park; Sun Mi Kim; Bo La Yun; Mijung Jang; Bohyoung Kim; Ja Yoon Jang; Jong Yoon Lee; Soo Hyun Lee
Journal:  Medicine (Baltimore)       Date:  2019-01       Impact factor: 1.817

View more
  3 in total

1.  Can strain US-elastography with strain ratio (SRE) improve the diagnostic accuracy in the assessment of breast lesions? Preliminary results.

Authors:  Daniela Elia; Daniele Fresilli; Patrizia Pacini; Sara Cardaccio; Giorgia Polti; Olga Guiban; Ilaria Celletti; Eriselda Kutrolli; Carlo De Felice; Rossella Occhiato; Corrado De Vito; Maria Ida Amabile; Alessandro De Luca; Vito D'Andrea; Massimo Vergine; Federica Pediconi; Ferdinando D'Ambrosio; Vito Cantisani
Journal:  J Ultrasound       Date:  2020-07-10

2.  Accuracy of mammography and ultrasonography and their BI-RADS in detection of breast malignancy.

Authors:  Naser Ghaemian; Neda Haji Ghazi Tehrani; Mehrdad Nabahati
Journal:  Caspian J Intern Med       Date:  2021

3.  Diagnostic accuracy of S-Detect to breast cancer on ultrasonography: A meta-analysis (PRISMA).

Authors:  Xiaolei Wang; Shuang Meng
Journal:  Medicine (Baltimore)       Date:  2022-08-26       Impact factor: 1.817

  3 in total

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.