D Zopfs1, K Laukamp2, R Reimer2, N Grosse Hokamp2, C Kabbasch2, J Borggrefe3, L Pennig2, A C Bunck2, M Schlamann2, S Lennartz2. 1. From the Institute for Diagnostic and Interventional Radiology (D.Z., K.L., R.R., N.G.H., C.K., L.P., A.C.B., M.S., S.L.), Faculty of Medicine and University Hospital Cologne, University of Cologne, Cologne, Germany David.zopfs@uk-koeln.de. 2. From the Institute for Diagnostic and Interventional Radiology (D.Z., K.L., R.R., N.G.H., C.K., L.P., A.C.B., M.S., S.L.), Faculty of Medicine and University Hospital Cologne, University of Cologne, Cologne, Germany. 3. Department of Radiology (J.B.), Neuroradiology and Nuclear Medicine, Johannes Wesling University Hospital, Ruhr University Bochum, Bochum, Germany.
Abstract
BACKGROUND AND PURPOSE: MR imaging is the technique of choice for follow-up of patients with brain metastases, yet the radiologic assessment is often tedious and error-prone, especially in examinations with multiple metastases or subtle changes. This study aimed to determine whether using automated color-coding improves the radiologic assessment of brain metastases compared with conventional reading. MATERIALS AND METHODS: One hundred twenty-one pairs of follow-up examinations of patients with brain metastases were assessed. Two radiologists determined the presence of progression, regression, mixed changes, or stable disease between the follow-up examinations and indicated subjective diagnostic certainty regarding their decisions in a conventional reading and a second reading using automated color-coding after an interval of 8 weeks. RESULTS: The rate of correctly classified diagnoses was higher (91.3%, 221/242, versus 74.0%, 179/242, P < .01) when using automated color-coding, and the median Likert score for diagnostic certainty improved from 2 (interquartile range, 2-3) to 4 (interquartile range, 3-5) (P < .05) compared with the conventional reading. Interrater agreement was excellent (κ = 0.80; 95% CI, 0.71-0.89) with automated color-coding compared with a moderate agreement (κ = 0.46; 95% CI, 0.34-0.58) with the conventional reading approach. When considering the time required for image preprocessing, the overall average time for reading an examination was longer in the automated color-coding approach (91.5 [SD, 23.1] seconds versus 79.4 [SD, 34.7 ] seconds, P < .001). CONCLUSIONS: Compared with the conventional reading, automated color-coding of lesion changes in follow-up examinations of patients with brain metastases significantly increased the rate of correct diagnoses and resulted in higher diagnostic certainty.
BACKGROUND AND PURPOSE: MR imaging is the technique of choice for follow-up of patients with brain metastases, yet the radiologic assessment is often tedious and error-prone, especially in examinations with multiple metastases or subtle changes. This study aimed to determine whether using automated color-coding improves the radiologic assessment of brain metastases compared with conventional reading. MATERIALS AND METHODS: One hundred twenty-one pairs of follow-up examinations of patients with brain metastases were assessed. Two radiologists determined the presence of progression, regression, mixed changes, or stable disease between the follow-up examinations and indicated subjective diagnostic certainty regarding their decisions in a conventional reading and a second reading using automated color-coding after an interval of 8 weeks. RESULTS: The rate of correctly classified diagnoses was higher (91.3%, 221/242, versus 74.0%, 179/242, P < .01) when using automated color-coding, and the median Likert score for diagnostic certainty improved from 2 (interquartile range, 2-3) to 4 (interquartile range, 3-5) (P < .05) compared with the conventional reading. Interrater agreement was excellent (κ = 0.80; 95% CI, 0.71-0.89) with automated color-coding compared with a moderate agreement (κ = 0.46; 95% CI, 0.34-0.58) with the conventional reading approach. When considering the time required for image preprocessing, the overall average time for reading an examination was longer in the automated color-coding approach (91.5 [SD, 23.1] seconds versus 79.4 [SD, 34.7 ] seconds, P < .001). CONCLUSIONS: Compared with the conventional reading, automated color-coding of lesion changes in follow-up examinations of patients with brain metastases significantly increased the rate of correct diagnoses and resulted in higher diagnostic certainty.
Authors: A Galletto Pregliasco; A Collin; A Guéguen; M A Metten; J Aboab; R Deschamps; O Gout; L Duron; J C Sadik; J Savatovsky; A Lecler Journal: AJNR Am J Neuroradiol Date: 2018-06-07 Impact factor: 3.825
Authors: Falgun H Chokshi; Danny R Hughes; Jennifer M Wang; Mark E Mullins; C Matthew Hawkins; Richard Duszak Journal: J Am Coll Radiol Date: 2015-05-09 Impact factor: 5.532
Authors: An Tang; Roger Tam; Alexandre Cadrin-Chênevert; Will Guest; Jaron Chong; Joseph Barfett; Leonid Chepelev; Robyn Cairns; J Ross Mitchell; Mark D Cicero; Manuel Gaudreau Poudrette; Jacob L Jaremko; Caroline Reinhold; Benoit Gallix; Bruce Gray; Raym Geis Journal: Can Assoc Radiol J Date: 2018-04-11 Impact factor: 2.248
Authors: J Raymond Geis; Adrian P Brady; Carol C Wu; Jack Spencer; Erik Ranschaert; Jacob L Jaremko; Steve G Langer; Andrea Borondy Kitts; Judy Birch; William F Shields; Robert van den Hoven van Genderen; Elmar Kotter; Judy Wawira Gichoya; Tessa S Cook; Matthew B Morgan; An Tang; Nabile M Safdar; Marc Kohli Journal: Radiology Date: 2019-10-01 Impact factor: 11.105
Authors: C Deuschl; J Kirchner; T D Poeppel; B Schaarschmidt; S Kebir; N El Hindy; J Hense; H H Quick; M Glas; K Herrmann; L Umutlu; C Moenninghoff; A Radbruch; M Forsting; M Schlamann Journal: Eur J Nucl Med Mol Imaging Date: 2017-12-28 Impact factor: 9.236
Authors: Jill S Barnholtz-Sloan; Andrew E Sloan; Faith G Davis; Fawn D Vigneau; Ping Lai; Raymond E Sawaya Journal: J Clin Oncol Date: 2004-07-15 Impact factor: 44.544