PURPOSE: To study the use of a computer vision method as a second reader for the detection of spiculated lesions on screening mammograms. MATERIALS AND METHODS: An algorithmic computer process for the detection of spiculated lesions on digitized screen-film mammograms was applied to 85 four-view clinical cases: 36 cases with cancer proved by means of biopsy and 49 cases with negative findings at examination and follow-up. The computer detections were printed as film with added outlines that indicated the suspected cancers. Four radiologists screened the 85 cases twice, once without and once with the computer reports as ancillary films. RESULTS: The algorithm alone achieved 100% sensitivity, with a specificity of 82%. The computer reports increased the average radiologist sensitivity by 9.7% (P = .005), moving from 80.6% to 90.3%, with no decrease in average specificity. CONCLUSION: The study demonstrated that computer analysis of mammograms can provide a substantial and statistically significant increase in radiologist screening efficacy.
PURPOSE: To study the use of a computer vision method as a second reader for the detection of spiculated lesions on screening mammograms. MATERIALS AND METHODS: An algorithmic computer process for the detection of spiculated lesions on digitized screen-film mammograms was applied to 85 four-view clinical cases: 36 cases with cancer proved by means of biopsy and 49 cases with negative findings at examination and follow-up. The computer detections were printed as film with added outlines that indicated the suspected cancers. Four radiologists screened the 85 cases twice, once without and once with the computer reports as ancillary films. RESULTS: The algorithm alone achieved 100% sensitivity, with a specificity of 82%. The computer reports increased the average radiologist sensitivity by 9.7% (P = .005), moving from 80.6% to 90.3%, with no decrease in average specificity. CONCLUSION: The study demonstrated that computer analysis of mammograms can provide a substantial and statistically significant increase in radiologist screening efficacy.
Authors: Jun Wei; Berkman Sahiner; Lubomir M Hadjiiski; Heang-Ping Chan; Nicholas Petrick; Mark A Helvie; Marilyn A Roubidoux; Jun Ge; Chuan Zhou Journal: Med Phys Date: 2005-09 Impact factor: 4.071
Authors: Roberto R Pereira; Paulo M Azevedo Marques; Marcelo O Honda; Sergio K Kinoshita; Roger Engelmann; Chisako Muramatsu; Kunio Doi Journal: J Digit Imaging Date: 2007-09 Impact factor: 4.056
Authors: Bin Zheng; Claudia Mello-Thoms; Xiao-Hui Wang; Gordon S Abrams; Jules H Sumkin; Denise M Chough; Marie A Ganott; Amy Lu; David Gur Journal: Acad Radiol Date: 2007-08 Impact factor: 3.173