Diagnostic accuracy of Fischer SenoScan digital mammography versus screen-film mammography in a diagnostic mammography population

被引:34
作者
Cole, E
Pisano, ED
Brown, M
Kuzmiak, C
Braeuning, MP
Kim, HH
Jong, R
Walsh, R
机构
[1] Dept Radiol, Chapel Hill, NC 27599 USA
[2] Univ N Carolina, Lineberger Comprehens Canc Ctr, Chapel Hill, NC 27515 USA
[3] Christ Hosp, Dept Radiol, Cincinnati, OH 45219 USA
[4] Catholic Univ Korea, Kangnam St Marys Hosp, Dept Radiol, Seoul, South Korea
[5] Univ Toronto, Sunnybrook & Womens Coll, Hlth Sci Ctr, Dept Med Imaging, Toronto, ON, Canada
[6] Duke Univ, Med Ctr, Dept Radiol, Durham, NC 27706 USA
关键词
digital mammography; FDA clinical trial; ROC analysis; observer performance; diagnostic accuracy;
D O I
10.1016/j.acra.2004.04.003
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
Rationale and Objectives. To compare the diagnostic accuracy of the Fischer Senoscan Digital Mammography System with that of standard screen-film mammography in a population of women presenting for screening or diagnostic mammography. Materials and Methods. Enrollment of patients took place at six different breast-imaging centers between 1997 and 1999. A total of 247 cases were selected for inclusion in the final reader study. All known cancer cases were included (111) from all six participating sites representing 45% of the total cases. The remaining 136 cases (55%) were randomly selected from all available benign or negative cases from three of the six sites. A complete case consisted of both a (unilateral or bilateral) digital and screen-film mammogram of the same patient. Eight radiologists interpreted the cases in laser-printed digital and screen-film hardcopy formats. The study was designed to detect differences of 0.05 in the ROC area under the curve (AUC) between digital and screen-film radiologist interpretation performance. Results. The average AUC for the Senoscan digital was 0.715 for the 8 readers. The average AUC for screen-film was 0.765. The difference AUC of -0.05 falls within the 95% confidence interval (-0.101, 0.002). The average sensitivity was 66% and specificity 67% for SenoScan full-field digital mammography. The average screen-film mammography sensitivity and specificity were 74% and 60%, respectively. Conclusion. No statistically significant difference in diagnostic accuracy between the Fischer Senoscan and screen-film mammography was detected in this study.
引用
收藏
页码:879 / 886
页数:8
相关论文
共 11 条
[1]   Segmentation and numerical analysis of microcalcifications on mammograms using mathematical morphology [J].
Betal, D ;
Roberts, N ;
Whitehouse, GH .
BRITISH JOURNAL OF RADIOLOGY, 1997, 70 (837) :903-917
[2]   DIGITAL MAMMOGRAPHY - ROC STUDIES OF THE EFFECTS OF PIXEL SIZE AND UNSHARP-MASK FILTERING ON THE DETECTION OF SUBTLE MICROCALCIFICATIONS [J].
CHAN, HP ;
VYBORNY, CJ ;
MACMAHON, H ;
METZ, CE ;
DOI, K ;
SICKLES, EA .
INVESTIGATIVE RADIOLOGY, 1987, 22 (07) :581-589
[3]   Diagnostic accuracy of digital mammography in patients with dense breasts who underwent problem-solving mammography: Effects of image processing and lesion type [J].
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 .
RADIOLOGY, 2003, 226 (01) :153-160
[4]   HISTORY AND STATUS OF X-RAY MAMMOGRAPHY [J].
HENDEE, WR .
HEALTH PHYSICS, 1995, 69 (05) :636-648
[5]   Comparison of full-field digital mammography with screen-film mammography for cancer detection: Results of 4,945 paired examinations [J].
Lewin, JM ;
Hendrick, RE ;
D'Orsi, CJ ;
Isaacs, PK ;
Moss, LJ ;
Karellas, A ;
Sisney, GA ;
Kuni, CC ;
Cutter, GR .
RADIOLOGY, 2001, 218 (03) :873-880
[6]   Computer-aided diagnosis in full digital mammography [J].
Nawano, S ;
Murakami, K ;
Moriyama, N ;
Kobatake, H ;
Takeo, H ;
Shimura, K .
INVESTIGATIVE RADIOLOGY, 1999, 34 (04) :310-316
[7]  
Obuchowski N A, 1995, Acad Radiol, V2 Suppl 1, pS22
[8]   Interpretation of digital mammograms: Comparison of speed and accuracy of soft-copy versus printed-film display [J].
Pisano, ED ;
Cole, EB ;
Kistner, EO ;
Muller, KE ;
Hemminger, BM ;
Brown, ML ;
Johnston, RE ;
Kuzmiak, CM ;
Braeuning, MP ;
Freimanis, RI ;
Soo, MS ;
Baker, JA ;
Walsh, R .
RADIOLOGY, 2002, 223 (02) :483-488
[9]  
Sickles EA, 2000, RADIOLOGY, V215, P1
[10]   Full field digital mammography scanner [J].
Tesic, MM ;
Piccaro, MF ;
Munier, B .
EUROPEAN JOURNAL OF RADIOLOGY, 1999, 31 (01) :2-17