Cargando…

Evaluate the performance of four artificial intelligence‐aided diagnostic systems in identifying and measuring four types of pulmonary nodules

PURPOSE: This study aims to evaluate the performance of four artificial intelligence‐aided diagnostic systems in identifying and measuring four types of pulmonary nodules. METHODS: Four types of nodules were implanted in a commercial lung phantom. The phantom was scanned with multislice spiral compu...

Descripción completa

Detalles Bibliográficos
Autores principales: Wu, Ming‐yue, Li, Yong, Fu, Bin‐jie, Wang, Guo‐shu, Chu, Zhi‐gang, Deng, Dan
Formato: Online Artículo Texto
Lenguaje:English
Publicado: John Wiley and Sons Inc. 2020
Materias:
Acceso en línea:https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC7856495/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/33369008
http://dx.doi.org/10.1002/acm2.13142
_version_ 1783646262627663872
author Wu, Ming‐yue
Li, Yong
Fu, Bin‐jie
Wang, Guo‐shu
Chu, Zhi‐gang
Deng, Dan
author_facet Wu, Ming‐yue
Li, Yong
Fu, Bin‐jie
Wang, Guo‐shu
Chu, Zhi‐gang
Deng, Dan
author_sort Wu, Ming‐yue
collection PubMed
description PURPOSE: This study aims to evaluate the performance of four artificial intelligence‐aided diagnostic systems in identifying and measuring four types of pulmonary nodules. METHODS: Four types of nodules were implanted in a commercial lung phantom. The phantom was scanned with multislice spiral computed tomography, after which four systems (A, B, C, D) were used to identify the nodules and measure their volumes. RESULTS: The relative volume error (RVE) of system A was the lowest for all nodules, except for small ground glass nodules (SGGNs). System C had the smallest RVE for SGGNs, −0.13 (−0.56, 0.00). In the Bland–Altman test, only systems A and C passed the consistency test, P = 0.40. In terms of precision, the miss rate (MR) of system C was 0.00% for small solid nodules (SSNs), ground glass nodules (GGNs), and solid nodules (SNs) but 4.17% for SGGNs. The comparable system D MRs for SGGNs, SSNs, and GGNs were 71.30%, 25.93%, and 47.22%, respectively, the highest among all the systems. Receiver operating characteristic curve analysis indicated that system A had the best performance in recognizing SSNs and GGNs, with areas under the curve of 0.91 and 0.68. System C had the best performance for SGGNs (AUC = 0.91). CONCLUSION: Among four types nodules, SGGNs are the most difficult to recognize, indicating the need to improve higher accuracy and precision of artificial systems. System A most accurately measured nodule volume. System C was most precise in recognizing all four types of nodules, especially SGGN.
format Online
Article
Text
id pubmed-7856495
institution National Center for Biotechnology Information
language English
publishDate 2020
publisher John Wiley and Sons Inc.
record_format MEDLINE/PubMed
spelling pubmed-78564952021-02-05 Evaluate the performance of four artificial intelligence‐aided diagnostic systems in identifying and measuring four types of pulmonary nodules Wu, Ming‐yue Li, Yong Fu, Bin‐jie Wang, Guo‐shu Chu, Zhi‐gang Deng, Dan J Appl Clin Med Phys Medical Imaging PURPOSE: This study aims to evaluate the performance of four artificial intelligence‐aided diagnostic systems in identifying and measuring four types of pulmonary nodules. METHODS: Four types of nodules were implanted in a commercial lung phantom. The phantom was scanned with multislice spiral computed tomography, after which four systems (A, B, C, D) were used to identify the nodules and measure their volumes. RESULTS: The relative volume error (RVE) of system A was the lowest for all nodules, except for small ground glass nodules (SGGNs). System C had the smallest RVE for SGGNs, −0.13 (−0.56, 0.00). In the Bland–Altman test, only systems A and C passed the consistency test, P = 0.40. In terms of precision, the miss rate (MR) of system C was 0.00% for small solid nodules (SSNs), ground glass nodules (GGNs), and solid nodules (SNs) but 4.17% for SGGNs. The comparable system D MRs for SGGNs, SSNs, and GGNs were 71.30%, 25.93%, and 47.22%, respectively, the highest among all the systems. Receiver operating characteristic curve analysis indicated that system A had the best performance in recognizing SSNs and GGNs, with areas under the curve of 0.91 and 0.68. System C had the best performance for SGGNs (AUC = 0.91). CONCLUSION: Among four types nodules, SGGNs are the most difficult to recognize, indicating the need to improve higher accuracy and precision of artificial systems. System A most accurately measured nodule volume. System C was most precise in recognizing all four types of nodules, especially SGGN. John Wiley and Sons Inc. 2020-12-24 /pmc/articles/PMC7856495/ /pubmed/33369008 http://dx.doi.org/10.1002/acm2.13142 Text en © 2020 The Authors. Journal of Applied Clinical Medical Physics published by Wiley Periodicals, Inc. on behalf of American Association of Physicists in Medicine This is an open access article under the terms of the http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/ License, which permits use, distribution and reproduction in any medium, provided the original work is properly cited.
spellingShingle Medical Imaging
Wu, Ming‐yue
Li, Yong
Fu, Bin‐jie
Wang, Guo‐shu
Chu, Zhi‐gang
Deng, Dan
Evaluate the performance of four artificial intelligence‐aided diagnostic systems in identifying and measuring four types of pulmonary nodules
title Evaluate the performance of four artificial intelligence‐aided diagnostic systems in identifying and measuring four types of pulmonary nodules
title_full Evaluate the performance of four artificial intelligence‐aided diagnostic systems in identifying and measuring four types of pulmonary nodules
title_fullStr Evaluate the performance of four artificial intelligence‐aided diagnostic systems in identifying and measuring four types of pulmonary nodules
title_full_unstemmed Evaluate the performance of four artificial intelligence‐aided diagnostic systems in identifying and measuring four types of pulmonary nodules
title_short Evaluate the performance of four artificial intelligence‐aided diagnostic systems in identifying and measuring four types of pulmonary nodules
title_sort evaluate the performance of four artificial intelligence‐aided diagnostic systems in identifying and measuring four types of pulmonary nodules
topic Medical Imaging
url https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC7856495/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/33369008
http://dx.doi.org/10.1002/acm2.13142
work_keys_str_mv AT wumingyue evaluatetheperformanceoffourartificialintelligenceaideddiagnosticsystemsinidentifyingandmeasuringfourtypesofpulmonarynodules
AT liyong evaluatetheperformanceoffourartificialintelligenceaideddiagnosticsystemsinidentifyingandmeasuringfourtypesofpulmonarynodules
AT fubinjie evaluatetheperformanceoffourartificialintelligenceaideddiagnosticsystemsinidentifyingandmeasuringfourtypesofpulmonarynodules
AT wangguoshu evaluatetheperformanceoffourartificialintelligenceaideddiagnosticsystemsinidentifyingandmeasuringfourtypesofpulmonarynodules
AT chuzhigang evaluatetheperformanceoffourartificialintelligenceaideddiagnosticsystemsinidentifyingandmeasuringfourtypesofpulmonarynodules
AT dengdan evaluatetheperformanceoffourartificialintelligenceaideddiagnosticsystemsinidentifyingandmeasuringfourtypesofpulmonarynodules