Top

Published in:

01-10-2007 | Gastrointestinal

Effect of computer-aided detection as a second reader in multidetector-row CT colonography

Authors: Thomas Mang, Philipp Peloschek, Christina Plank, Andrea Maier, Anno Graser, Michael Weber, Christian Herold, Luca Bogoni, Wolfgang Schima

Published in: European Radiology | Issue 10/2007

Abstract

Our purpose was to assess the effect of computer-aided detection (CAD) on lesion detection as a second reader in computed tomographic colonography, and to compare the influence of CAD on the performance of readers with different levels of expertise. Fifty-two CT colonography patient data-sets (37 patients: 55 endoscopically confirmed polyps ≥0.5 cm, seven cancers; 15 patients: no abnormalities) were retrospectively reviewed by four radiologists (two expert, two nonexpert). After primary data evaluation, a second reading augmented with findings of CAD (polyp-enhanced view, Siemens) was performed. Sensitivities and reading time were calculated for each reader without CAD and supported by CAD findings. The sensitivity of expert readers was 91% each, and of nonexpert readers, 76% and 75%, respectively, for polyp detection. CAD increased the sensitivity of expert readers to 96% (P = 0.25) and 93% (P = 1), and that of nonexpert readers to 91% (P = 0.008) and 95% (P = 0.001), respectively. All four readers diagnosed 100% of cancers, but CAD alone only 43%. CAD increased reading time by 2.1 min (mean). CAD as a second reader significantly improves sensitivity for polyp detection in a high disease prevalence population for nonexpert readers. CAD causes a modest increase in reading time. CAD is of limited value in the detection of cancer.

Taylor SA, Laghi A, Lefere P, Halligan S, Stoker J (2006) European society of gastrointestinal and abdominal radiology (ESGAR): consensus statement on CT colonography. Eur Radiol 17:575–579CrossRef

Halligan S, Altman DG, Taylor SA, Mallett S, Deeks JJ, Bartram CI, Atkin W (2005) CT colonography in the detection of colorectal polyps and cancer: systematic review, meta-analysis, and proposed minimum data set for study level reporting. Radiology 237:893–904PubMedCrossRef

Cotton PB, Durkalski VL, Pineau BC, Palesch YY, Mauldin PD, Hoffman B, Vining DJ, Small WC, Affronti J, Rex D, Kopecky KK, Ackerman S, Burdick JS, Brewington C, Turner MA, Zfass A, Wright AR, Iyer RB, Lynch P, Sivak MV, Butler H (2004) Computed tomographic colonography (virtual colonoscopy): a multicenter comparison with standard colonoscopy for detection of colorectal neoplasia. JAMA 291:1713–1719PubMedCrossRef

Johnson CD, Harmsen WS, Wilson LA, Maccarty RL, Welch TJ, Ilstrup DM, Ahlquist DA (2003) Prospective blinded evaluation of computed tomographic colonography for screen detection of colorectal polyps. Gastroenterology 125:311–319PubMedCrossRef

Pickhardt PJ, Choi JR, Hwang I, Butler JA, Puckett ML, Hildebrandt HA, Wong RK, Nugent PA, Mysliwiec PA, Schindler WR (2003) Computed tomographic virtual colonoscopy to screen for colorectal neoplasia in asymptomatic adults. N Engl J Med 349:2191–2200PubMedCrossRef

Rockey DC, Paulson E, Niedzwiecki D, Davis W, Bosworth HB, Sanders L, Yee J, Henderson J, Hatten P, Burdick S, Sanyal A, Rubin DT, Sterling M, Akerkar G, Bhutani MS, Binmoeller K, Garvie J, Bini EJ, McQuaid K, Foster WL, Thompson WM, Dachman A, Halvorsen R (2005) Analysis of air contrast barium enema, computed tomographic colonography, and colonoscopy: prospective comparison. Lancet 365:305–311PubMed

Ferrucci JT (2005) Colonoscopy: virtual and optical-another look, another view. Radiology 235:13–16PubMedCrossRef

Halligan S, Atkin W (2005) Unbiased studies are needed before virtual colonoscopy can be dismissed. Lancet 365:275–276PubMed

Gluecker T, Meuwly JY, Pescatore P, Schnyder P, Delarive J, Jornod P, Meuli R, Dorta G (2002) Effect of investigator experience in CT colonography. Eur Radiol 12:1405–1409PubMedCrossRef

10.

Taylor SA, Halligan S, Burling D, Morley S, Bassett P, Atkin W, Bartram CI (2004) CT colonography: effect of experience and training on reader performance. Eur Radiol 14:1025–1033PubMedCrossRef

11.

Slater A, Taylor SA, Tam E, Gartner L, Scarth J, Peiris C, Gupta A, Marshall M, Burling D, Halligan S (2006) Reader error during CT colonography: causes and implications for training. Eur Radiol 16:2275–2283PubMedCrossRef

12.

Pickhardt PJ (2003) Three-dimensional endoluminal CT colonography (virtual colonoscopy): comparison of three commercially available systems. AJR Am J Roentgenol 181:1599–1606PubMed

13.

Yoshida H, Dachman AH (2005) CAD techniques, challenges, and controversies in computed tomographic colonography. Abdom Imaging 30:26–41PubMedCrossRef

14.

Yoshida H, Nappi J, MacEneaney P, Rubin DT, Dachman AH (2002) Computer-aided diagnosis scheme for detection of polyps at CT colonography. Radiographics 22:963–979PubMed

15.

Bogoni L, Cathier P, Dundar M, Jerebko A, Lakare S, Liang J, Periaswamy S, Baker ME, Macari M (2005) Computer-aided detection (CAD) for CT colonography: a tool to address a growing need. Br J Radiol 78(Spec No 1):S57–S62PubMedCrossRef

16.

Summers RM, Jerebko AK, Franaszek M, Malley JD, Johnson CD (2002) Colonic polyps: complementary role of computer-aided detection in CT colonography. Radiology 225:391–399PubMedCrossRef

17.

Taylor SA, Halligan S, Burling D, Roddie ME, Honeyfield L, McQuillan J, Amin H, Dehmeshki J (2006) Computer-assisted reader software versus expert reviewers for polyp detection on CT colonography. AJR Am J Roentgenol 186:696–702PubMedCrossRef

18.

Fidler JL, Johnson CD, MacCarty RL, Welch TJ, Hara AK, Harmsen WS (2002) Detection of flat lesions in the colon with CT colonography. Abdom Imaging 27:292–300PubMed

19.

Pickhardt PJ, Nugent PA, Choi JR, Schindler WR (2004) Flat colorectal lesions in asymptomatic adults: implications for screening with CT virtual colonoscopy. AJR Am J Roentgenol 183:1343–1347PubMed

20.

Newcombe RG (1998) Improved confidence intervals for the difference between binomial proportions based on paired data. Stat Med 17:2635–2650PubMedCrossRef

21.

Soto JA, Barish MA, Yee J (2005) Reader training in CT colonography: how much is enough? Radiology 237:26–27PubMedCrossRef

22.

van Dam J, Cotton P, Johnson CD, McFarland BG, Pineau BC, Provenzale D, Ransohoff D, Rex D, Rockey D, Wootton FT 3rd (2004) AGA future trends report: CT colonography. Gastroenterology 127:970–984PubMedCrossRef

23.

Summers RM, Yao J, Pickhardt PJ, Franaszek M, Bitter I, Brickman D, Krishna V, Choi JR (2005) Computed tomographic virtual colonoscopy computer-aided polyp detection in a screening population. Gastroenterology 129:1832–1844PubMedCrossRef

24.

Yoshida H, Dachman AH (2004) Computer-aided diagnosis for CT colonography. Semin Ultrasound CT MR 25:419–431PubMedCrossRef

25.

Mani A, Napel S, Paik DS, Jeffrey RB Jr, Yee J, Olcott EW, Prokesch R, Davila M, Schraedley-Desmond P, Beaulieu CF (2004) Computed tomography colonography: feasibility of computer-aided polyp detection in a “first reader” paradigm. J Comput Assist Tomogr 28:318–326PubMedCrossRef

26.

Taylor SA, Halligan S, Slater A, Goh V, Burling DN, Roddie ME, Honeyfield L, McQuillan J, Amin H, Dehmeshki J (2006) Polyp detection with CT colonography: primary 3D endoluminal analysis versus primary 2D transverse analysis with computer-assisted reader software. Radiology 239:759–767PubMedCrossRef

27.

Kiss G, Van Cleynenbreugel J, Thomeer M, Suetens P, Marchal G (2002) Computer-aided diagnosis in virtual colonography via combination of surface normal and sphere fitting methods. Eur Radiol 12:77–81PubMedCrossRef

28.

Nicholson FB, Barro JL, Bartram CI, Dehmeshki J, Halligan S, Taylor S, Kamm MA (2005) The role of CT colonography in colorectal cancer screening. Am J Gastroenterol 100:2315–2323PubMedCrossRef

29.

Burling D, Halligan S, Altman DG, Atkin W, Bartram C, Fenlon H, Laghi A, Stoker J, Taylor S, Frost R, Dessey G, De Villiers M, Florie J, Foley S, Honeyfield L, Iannaccone R, Gallo T, Kay C, Lefere P, Lowe A, Mangiapane F, Marrannes J, Neri E, Nieddu G, Nicholson D, O’Hare A, Ori S, Politi B, Poulus M, Regge D, Renaut L, Rudralingham V, Signoretta S, Vagli P, Van der Hulst V, Williams-Butt J (2006) CT colonography interpretation times: effect of reader experience, fatigue, and scan findings in a multi-centre setting. Eur Radiol 16:1745–1749PubMedCrossRef

30.

Oto A, Gelebek V, Oguz BS, Sivri B, Deger A, Akhan O, Besim A (2003) CT attenuation of colorectal polypoid lesions: evaluation of contrast enhancement in CT colonography. Eur Radiol 13:1657–1663PubMedCrossRef

31.

Luboldt W, Mann C, Tryon CL, Vonthein R, Stueker D, Kroll M, Luz O, Claussen CD, Vogl TJ (2002) Computer-aided diagnosis in contrast-enhanced CT colonography: an approach based on contrast. Eur Radiol 12:2236–2241PubMed

32.

Luboldt W, Tryon C, Kroll M, Toussaint TL, Holzer K, Hoepffner N, Vogl TJ (2005) Automated mass detection in contrast-enhanced CT colonography: an approach based on contrast and volume. Eur Radiol 15:247–253PubMedCrossRef

Title: Effect of computer-aided detection as a second reader in multidetector-row CT colonography
Authors: Thomas Mang
Philipp Peloschek
Christina Plank
Andrea Maier
Anno Graser
Michael Weber
Christian Herold
Luca Bogoni
Wolfgang Schima
Publication date: 01-10-2007
Publisher: Springer-Verlag
Published in: European Radiology / Issue 10/2007
Print ISSN: 0938-7994
Electronic ISSN: 1432-1084
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s00330-007-0608-z

At a glance: The STEP trials

Springer Medicine

Effect of computer-aided detection as a second reader in multidetector-row CT colonography

Abstract

At a glance: The STEP trials

Springer Medicine

Abstract

Please log in to get access to this content

Other articles of this Issue 10/2007

Detecting endoleaks after endovascular AAA repair with a minimally invasive, implantable, telemetric pressure sensor: an in vitro study

Delineation of temporal bone anatomy: feasibility of low-dose 64-row CT in regard to image quality

Magnetic resonance imaging of acute pulmonary embolism

Evaluation of dose exposure in 64-slice CT colonography

Diffusion tensor MR imaging of the cervical spinal cord in patients with multiple sclerosis

Computer-aided detection in CT colonography: initial clinical experience using a prototype system