PURPOSE: To evaluate whether a computer-aided vessel-suppression system improves lung nodule detection in routine clinical settings. MATERIALS AND METHODS: We used computer software that automatically suppresses pulmonary vessels on chest CT while preserving pulmonary nodules. Sixty-one chest CT images were included in our study. Three radiologists independently read either standard CT images alone or both computer-aided CT and standard CT images randomly to detect a pulmonary nodule ≥ 4 mm in diameter. After an interval of at least 15 days to avoid recall bias, the three radiologists interpreted the counterpart images of the same patients. The reference standard was decided by an expert panel. The primary endpoint was sensitivity. The secondary endpoint was interpretation time. RESULTS: The average sensitivity improved with computer-aided CT (72% for standard CT vs. 84% for computer-aided CT, p = 0.02). There was no difference in the false-positive rate (21% for both standard CT and computer-aided CT, p = 0.98). Although the average reading time was 9.5% longer for computer-aided plus standard CT compared with standard CT alone, the difference was not significant (p = 0.11). CONCLUSION: Vessel-suppressed CT images helped radiologists to improve the sensitivity of pulmonary nodule detection without compromising the false-positive rate.
PURPOSE: To evaluate whether a computer-aided vessel-suppression system improves lung nodule detection in routine clinical settings. MATERIALS AND METHODS: We used computer software that automatically suppresses pulmonary vessels on chest CT while preserving pulmonary nodules. Sixty-one chest CT images were included in our study. Three radiologists independently read either standard CT images alone or both computer-aided CT and standard CT images randomly to detect a pulmonary nodule ≥ 4 mm in diameter. After an interval of at least 15 days to avoid recall bias, the three radiologists interpreted the counterpart images of the same patients. The reference standard was decided by an expert panel. The primary endpoint was sensitivity. The secondary endpoint was interpretation time. RESULTS: The average sensitivity improved with computer-aided CT (72% for standard CT vs. 84% for computer-aided CT, p = 0.02). There was no difference in the false-positive rate (21% for both standard CT and computer-aided CT, p = 0.98). Although the average reading time was 9.5% longer for computer-aided plus standard CT compared with standard CT alone, the difference was not significant (p = 0.11). CONCLUSION: Vessel-suppressed CT images helped radiologists to improve the sensitivity of pulmonary nodule detection without compromising the false-positive rate.