Cargando…

Computer-aided detection (CAD) for breast MRI: evaluation of efficacy at 3.0 T

OBJECTIVE: The purpose of the study was to evaluate the accuracy of 3.0-T breast MRI interpretation using manual and fully automated kinetic analyses. MATERIAL AND METHODS: Manual MRI interpretation was done on an Advantage Workstation. Retrospectively, all examinations were processed with a compute...

Descripción completa

Detalles Bibliográficos
Autores principales: Meeuwis, Carla, van de Ven, Stephanie M., Stapper, Gerard, Fernandez Gallardo, Arancha M., van den Bosch, Maurice A. A. J., Mali, Willem P. Th. M., Veldhuis, Wouter B.
Formato: Texto
Lenguaje:English
Publicado: Springer-Verlag 2009
Materias:
Acceso en línea:https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC2822230/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/19727750
http://dx.doi.org/10.1007/s00330-009-1573-5
_version_ 1782177504947077120
author Meeuwis, Carla
van de Ven, Stephanie M.
Stapper, Gerard
Fernandez Gallardo, Arancha M.
van den Bosch, Maurice A. A. J.
Mali, Willem P. Th. M.
Veldhuis, Wouter B.
author_facet Meeuwis, Carla
van de Ven, Stephanie M.
Stapper, Gerard
Fernandez Gallardo, Arancha M.
van den Bosch, Maurice A. A. J.
Mali, Willem P. Th. M.
Veldhuis, Wouter B.
author_sort Meeuwis, Carla
collection PubMed
description OBJECTIVE: The purpose of the study was to evaluate the accuracy of 3.0-T breast MRI interpretation using manual and fully automated kinetic analyses. MATERIAL AND METHODS: Manual MRI interpretation was done on an Advantage Workstation. Retrospectively, all examinations were processed with a computer-aided detection (CAD) system. CAD data sets were interpreted by two experienced breast radiologists and two residents. For each lesion automated analysis of enhancement kinetics was evaluated at 50% and 100% thresholds. Forty-nine malignant and 22 benign lesions were evaluated. RESULTS: Using threshold enhancement alone, the sensitivity and specificity of CAD were 97.9% and 86.4%, respectively, for the 50% threshold, and 97.9% and 90%, respectively, for the 100% threshold. Manual interpretation by two breast radiologists showed a sensitivity of 84.6% and a specificity of 68.8%. For the same two radiologists the mean sensitivity and specificity for CAD-based interpretation was 90.4% (not significant) and 81.3% (significant at p < 0.05), respectively. With one-way ANOVA no significant differences were found between the two breast radiologists and the two residents together, or between any two readers separately. CONCLUSION: CAD-based analysis improved the specificity compared with manual analysis of enhancement. Automated analysis at 50% and 100% thresholds showed a high sensitivity and specificity for readers with varying levels of experience.
format Text
id pubmed-2822230
institution National Center for Biotechnology Information
language English
publishDate 2009
publisher Springer-Verlag
record_format MEDLINE/PubMed
spelling pubmed-28222302010-02-25 Computer-aided detection (CAD) for breast MRI: evaluation of efficacy at 3.0 T Meeuwis, Carla van de Ven, Stephanie M. Stapper, Gerard Fernandez Gallardo, Arancha M. van den Bosch, Maurice A. A. J. Mali, Willem P. Th. M. Veldhuis, Wouter B. Eur Radiol Breast OBJECTIVE: The purpose of the study was to evaluate the accuracy of 3.0-T breast MRI interpretation using manual and fully automated kinetic analyses. MATERIAL AND METHODS: Manual MRI interpretation was done on an Advantage Workstation. Retrospectively, all examinations were processed with a computer-aided detection (CAD) system. CAD data sets were interpreted by two experienced breast radiologists and two residents. For each lesion automated analysis of enhancement kinetics was evaluated at 50% and 100% thresholds. Forty-nine malignant and 22 benign lesions were evaluated. RESULTS: Using threshold enhancement alone, the sensitivity and specificity of CAD were 97.9% and 86.4%, respectively, for the 50% threshold, and 97.9% and 90%, respectively, for the 100% threshold. Manual interpretation by two breast radiologists showed a sensitivity of 84.6% and a specificity of 68.8%. For the same two radiologists the mean sensitivity and specificity for CAD-based interpretation was 90.4% (not significant) and 81.3% (significant at p < 0.05), respectively. With one-way ANOVA no significant differences were found between the two breast radiologists and the two residents together, or between any two readers separately. CONCLUSION: CAD-based analysis improved the specificity compared with manual analysis of enhancement. Automated analysis at 50% and 100% thresholds showed a high sensitivity and specificity for readers with varying levels of experience. Springer-Verlag 2009-09-02 2010 /pmc/articles/PMC2822230/ /pubmed/19727750 http://dx.doi.org/10.1007/s00330-009-1573-5 Text en © The Author(s) 2009 https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc/4.0/ This article is distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution Noncommercial License which permits any noncommercial use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided the original author(s) and source are credited.
spellingShingle Breast
Meeuwis, Carla
van de Ven, Stephanie M.
Stapper, Gerard
Fernandez Gallardo, Arancha M.
van den Bosch, Maurice A. A. J.
Mali, Willem P. Th. M.
Veldhuis, Wouter B.
Computer-aided detection (CAD) for breast MRI: evaluation of efficacy at 3.0 T
title Computer-aided detection (CAD) for breast MRI: evaluation of efficacy at 3.0 T
title_full Computer-aided detection (CAD) for breast MRI: evaluation of efficacy at 3.0 T
title_fullStr Computer-aided detection (CAD) for breast MRI: evaluation of efficacy at 3.0 T
title_full_unstemmed Computer-aided detection (CAD) for breast MRI: evaluation of efficacy at 3.0 T
title_short Computer-aided detection (CAD) for breast MRI: evaluation of efficacy at 3.0 T
title_sort computer-aided detection (cad) for breast mri: evaluation of efficacy at 3.0 t
topic Breast
url https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC2822230/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/19727750
http://dx.doi.org/10.1007/s00330-009-1573-5
work_keys_str_mv AT meeuwiscarla computeraideddetectioncadforbreastmrievaluationofefficacyat30t
AT vandevenstephaniem computeraideddetectioncadforbreastmrievaluationofefficacyat30t
AT stappergerard computeraideddetectioncadforbreastmrievaluationofefficacyat30t
AT fernandezgallardoarancham computeraideddetectioncadforbreastmrievaluationofefficacyat30t
AT vandenboschmauriceaaj computeraideddetectioncadforbreastmrievaluationofefficacyat30t
AT maliwillempthm computeraideddetectioncadforbreastmrievaluationofefficacyat30t
AT veldhuiswouterb computeraideddetectioncadforbreastmrievaluationofefficacyat30t