Cargando…

Evaluation of the INTERPRET decision-support system: can it improve the diagnostic value of magnetic resonance spectroscopy of the brain?

PURPOSE: We evaluated in a clinical setting the INTERPRET decision-support system (DSS), a software generated to aid in MRS analysis to achieve a specific diagnosis for brain lesions. METHODS: The material consisted of 100 examinations of focal intracranial lesions with confirmed diagnoses. MRS was...

Descripción completa

Detalles Bibliográficos
Autores principales: Hellström, J., Romanos Zapata, R., Libard, S., Wikström, J., Ortiz-Nieto, F., Alafuzoff, I., Raininko, R.
Formato: Online Artículo Texto
Lenguaje:English
Publicado: Springer Berlin Heidelberg 2018
Materias:
Acceso en línea:https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC6336758/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/30443796
http://dx.doi.org/10.1007/s00234-018-2129-7
_version_ 1783388111105949696
author Hellström, J.
Romanos Zapata, R.
Libard, S.
Wikström, J.
Ortiz-Nieto, F.
Alafuzoff, I.
Raininko, R.
author_facet Hellström, J.
Romanos Zapata, R.
Libard, S.
Wikström, J.
Ortiz-Nieto, F.
Alafuzoff, I.
Raininko, R.
author_sort Hellström, J.
collection PubMed
description PURPOSE: We evaluated in a clinical setting the INTERPRET decision-support system (DSS), a software generated to aid in MRS analysis to achieve a specific diagnosis for brain lesions. METHODS: The material consisted of 100 examinations of focal intracranial lesions with confirmed diagnoses. MRS was obtained at 1.5 T using TE 20–30 ms. Data were processed with the LCModel for conventional analysis. The INTERPRET DSS 3.1. was used to obtain specific diagnoses. MRI and MRS were reviewed by one interpreter. DSS analysis was made by another interpreter, in 80 cases by two interpreters. The diagnoses were compared with the definitive diagnoses. For comparisons between DSS, conventional MRS analysis, and MRI, the diagnoses were categorised: high-grade tumour, low-grade tumour, non-neoplastic lesion. RESULTS: Interobserver agreement in choosing the diagnosis from the INTERPRET database was 75%. The diagnosis was correct in 38/100 cases, incorrect in 57 cases. No good match was found in 5/100 cases. The diagnostic category was correct with DSS/conventional MRS/MRI in 67/58/52 cases, indeterminate in 5/8/20 cases, incorrect in 28/34/28 cases. Results with DSS were not significantly better than with conventional MRS analysis. All definitive diagnoses did not exist in the INTERPRET database. In the 61 adult patients with the diagnosis included in the database, DSS/conventional MRS/MRI yielded a correct diagnosis category in 48/32/29 cases (DSS vs conventional MRS: p = 0.002, DSS vs MRI: p = 0.0004). CONCLUSION: Use of the INTERPRET DSS did not improve MRS categorisation of the lesions in the unselected clinical cases. In adult patients with lesions existing in the INTERPRET database, DSS improved the results, which indicates the potential of this software with an extended database. ELECTRONIC SUPPLEMENTARY MATERIAL: The online version of this article (10.1007/s00234-018-2129-7) contains supplementary material, which is available to authorized users.
format Online
Article
Text
id pubmed-6336758
institution National Center for Biotechnology Information
language English
publishDate 2018
publisher Springer Berlin Heidelberg
record_format MEDLINE/PubMed
spelling pubmed-63367582019-02-01 Evaluation of the INTERPRET decision-support system: can it improve the diagnostic value of magnetic resonance spectroscopy of the brain? Hellström, J. Romanos Zapata, R. Libard, S. Wikström, J. Ortiz-Nieto, F. Alafuzoff, I. Raininko, R. Neuroradiology Diagnostic Neuroradiology PURPOSE: We evaluated in a clinical setting the INTERPRET decision-support system (DSS), a software generated to aid in MRS analysis to achieve a specific diagnosis for brain lesions. METHODS: The material consisted of 100 examinations of focal intracranial lesions with confirmed diagnoses. MRS was obtained at 1.5 T using TE 20–30 ms. Data were processed with the LCModel for conventional analysis. The INTERPRET DSS 3.1. was used to obtain specific diagnoses. MRI and MRS were reviewed by one interpreter. DSS analysis was made by another interpreter, in 80 cases by two interpreters. The diagnoses were compared with the definitive diagnoses. For comparisons between DSS, conventional MRS analysis, and MRI, the diagnoses were categorised: high-grade tumour, low-grade tumour, non-neoplastic lesion. RESULTS: Interobserver agreement in choosing the diagnosis from the INTERPRET database was 75%. The diagnosis was correct in 38/100 cases, incorrect in 57 cases. No good match was found in 5/100 cases. The diagnostic category was correct with DSS/conventional MRS/MRI in 67/58/52 cases, indeterminate in 5/8/20 cases, incorrect in 28/34/28 cases. Results with DSS were not significantly better than with conventional MRS analysis. All definitive diagnoses did not exist in the INTERPRET database. In the 61 adult patients with the diagnosis included in the database, DSS/conventional MRS/MRI yielded a correct diagnosis category in 48/32/29 cases (DSS vs conventional MRS: p = 0.002, DSS vs MRI: p = 0.0004). CONCLUSION: Use of the INTERPRET DSS did not improve MRS categorisation of the lesions in the unselected clinical cases. In adult patients with lesions existing in the INTERPRET database, DSS improved the results, which indicates the potential of this software with an extended database. ELECTRONIC SUPPLEMENTARY MATERIAL: The online version of this article (10.1007/s00234-018-2129-7) contains supplementary material, which is available to authorized users. Springer Berlin Heidelberg 2018-11-15 2019 /pmc/articles/PMC6336758/ /pubmed/30443796 http://dx.doi.org/10.1007/s00234-018-2129-7 Text en © The Author(s) 2018 Open Access This article is distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License (http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/), which permits unrestricted use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided you give appropriate credit to the original author(s) and the source, provide a link to the Creative Commons license, and indicate if changes were made.
spellingShingle Diagnostic Neuroradiology
Hellström, J.
Romanos Zapata, R.
Libard, S.
Wikström, J.
Ortiz-Nieto, F.
Alafuzoff, I.
Raininko, R.
Evaluation of the INTERPRET decision-support system: can it improve the diagnostic value of magnetic resonance spectroscopy of the brain?
title Evaluation of the INTERPRET decision-support system: can it improve the diagnostic value of magnetic resonance spectroscopy of the brain?
title_full Evaluation of the INTERPRET decision-support system: can it improve the diagnostic value of magnetic resonance spectroscopy of the brain?
title_fullStr Evaluation of the INTERPRET decision-support system: can it improve the diagnostic value of magnetic resonance spectroscopy of the brain?
title_full_unstemmed Evaluation of the INTERPRET decision-support system: can it improve the diagnostic value of magnetic resonance spectroscopy of the brain?
title_short Evaluation of the INTERPRET decision-support system: can it improve the diagnostic value of magnetic resonance spectroscopy of the brain?
title_sort evaluation of the interpret decision-support system: can it improve the diagnostic value of magnetic resonance spectroscopy of the brain?
topic Diagnostic Neuroradiology
url https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC6336758/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/30443796
http://dx.doi.org/10.1007/s00234-018-2129-7
work_keys_str_mv AT hellstromj evaluationoftheinterpretdecisionsupportsystemcanitimprovethediagnosticvalueofmagneticresonancespectroscopyofthebrain
AT romanoszapatar evaluationoftheinterpretdecisionsupportsystemcanitimprovethediagnosticvalueofmagneticresonancespectroscopyofthebrain
AT libards evaluationoftheinterpretdecisionsupportsystemcanitimprovethediagnosticvalueofmagneticresonancespectroscopyofthebrain
AT wikstromj evaluationoftheinterpretdecisionsupportsystemcanitimprovethediagnosticvalueofmagneticresonancespectroscopyofthebrain
AT ortiznietof evaluationoftheinterpretdecisionsupportsystemcanitimprovethediagnosticvalueofmagneticresonancespectroscopyofthebrain
AT alafuzoffi evaluationoftheinterpretdecisionsupportsystemcanitimprovethediagnosticvalueofmagneticresonancespectroscopyofthebrain
AT raininkor evaluationoftheinterpretdecisionsupportsystemcanitimprovethediagnosticvalueofmagneticresonancespectroscopyofthebrain