Diagnostic accuracy of digital mammography in patients with dense breasts who underwent problem-solving mammography: Effects of image processing and lesion type

被引:57
作者
Cole, EB
Pisano, ED
Kistner, EO
Muller, KE
Brown, ME
Feig, SA
Jong, RA
Maidment, ADA
Staiger, MJ
Kuzmiak, CM
Freimanis, RI
Lesko, N
Rosen, EL
Walsh, R
Williford, M
Braeuning, MP
机构
[1] Univ N Carolina, Sch Med, Dept Radiol, Chapel Hill, NC 27599 USA
[2] Univ N Carolina, Sch Med, Lineberger Comprehens Canc Ctr, Chapel Hill, NC 27599 USA
关键词
breast radiography; comparative studies; diagnostic radiology; observer performance; images; processing; radiography; digital; screens and films;
D O I
10.1148/radiol.2261012024
中图分类号
R8 [特种医学]; R445 [影像诊断学];
学科分类号
1002 ; 100207 ; 1009 ;
摘要
PURPOSE: To determine effects of lesion type (calcification vs mass) and image processing on radiologist's performance for area under the receiver operating characteristic curve (AUC), sensitivity, and specificity for detection of masses and calcifications with digital mammography in women with mammographically dense breasts. MATERIALS AND METHODS: This study included 201 women who underwent digital mammography at seven U.S. and Canadian medical centers. Three image-processing algorithms were applied to the digital images, which were acquired with Fischer, General Electric, and Lorad digital mammography units. Eighteen readers participated in the reader study (six readers per algorithm). Baseline values for reader performance with screen-film mammograms were obtained through the additional interpretation of 179 screen-film mammograms. A repeated-measures analysis of covariance allowing unequal slopes was used in each of the nine analyses (AUC, sensitivity, and specificity for each of three machines). Bonferroni correction was used. RESULTS: Although lesion type did not affect the AUC or sensitivity for Fischer digital images, it did affect specificity (P = .0004). For the General Electric digital images, AUC, sensitivity, and specificity were not affected by lesion type. For Lorad digital images, the results strongly suggested that lesion type affected AUC and sensitivity (P < .0001). None of the three image-processing methods tested affected the AUC, sensitivity, or specificity for the Fischer, General Electric, or Lorad digital images. CONCLUSION: Findings in this study indicate that radiologist's interpretation accuracy in interpreting digital mammograms depends on lesion type. Interpretation accuracy was not influenced by the image-processing method. (C) RSNA, 2002.
引用
收藏
页码:153 / 160
页数:8
相关论文
共 19 条
[1]   Variability in the interpretation of screening mammograms by US radiologists - Findings from a national sample [J].
Beam, CA ;
Layde, PM ;
Sullivan, DC .
ARCHIVES OF INTERNAL MEDICINE, 1996, 156 (02) :209-213
[2]   Breast imaging reporting and data system: Inter- and intraobserver variability in feature analysis and final assessment [J].
Berg, WA ;
Campassi, C ;
Langenberg, P ;
Sexton, MJ .
AMERICAN JOURNAL OF ROENTGENOLOGY, 2000, 174 (06) :1769-1777
[3]   FREE-RESPONSE METHODOLOGY - ALTERNATE ANALYSIS AND A NEW OBSERVER-PERFORMANCE EXPERIMENT [J].
CHAKRABORTY, DP ;
WINTER, LHL .
RADIOLOGY, 1990, 174 (03) :873-881
[5]   Digital mammography [J].
Feig, SA ;
Yaffe, MJ .
RADIOGRAPHICS, 1998, 18 (04) :893-901
[6]   Screen-film and digital mammography - Image quality and radiation dose considerations [J].
Haus, AG ;
Yaffe, MJ .
RADIOLOGIC CLINICS OF NORTH AMERICA, 2000, 38 (04) :871-+
[7]   IMAGING OF THE RADIOGRAPHICALLY DENSE BREAST [J].
JACKSON, VP ;
HENDRICK, RE ;
FEIG, SA ;
KOPANS, DB .
RADIOLOGY, 1993, 188 (02) :297-301
[8]   Improving breast cancer diagnosis with computer-aided diagnosis [J].
Jiang, YL ;
Nishikawa, RM ;
Schmidt, RA ;
Metz, CE ;
Giger, ML ;
Doi, K .
ACADEMIC RADIOLOGY, 1999, 6 (01) :22-33
[9]  
Kirk R. E., 1995, EXPT DESIGN PROCEDUR
[10]  
Kleinbaum DG., 2007, Applied Regression Analysis and Multivariable Methods, V4th ed