Computer-assisted diagnosis (CAD) in mammography: comparison of diagnostic accuracy of a new algorithm (CyclopusA®, Medicad) with two commercial systems

被引:0
|
作者
Ciatto, S. [4 ]
Cascio, D. [1 ]
Fauci, F. [1 ]
Magro, R. [1 ]
Raso, G. [1 ]
Ienzi, R. [2 ]
Martinelli, F. [4 ]
Simone, M. Vasile [3 ]
机构
[1] Univ Palermo, Dipartimento Fis & Tecnol Relat, Palermo, Italy
[2] Policlin Palermo, Ist Radiol, Palermo, Italy
[3] MEDICAD Srl, Palermo, Italy
[4] Ist Sci Prevenz Oncol, I-50133 Florence, Italy
来源
RADIOLOGIA MEDICA | 2009年 / 114卷 / 04期
关键词
Breast carcinoma; Computer-assisted diagnosis; Mammography; BREAST SCREENING-PROGRAM; AIDED DETECTION SYSTEM; CANCER-DETECTION; MORTALITY; IMPACT; RATES;
D O I
10.1007/s11547-009-0396-4
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
The study compares the diagnostic accuracy (correct identification of cancer) of a new computer-assisted diagnosis (CAD) system (Cyclopus) with two other commercial systems (R2 and CADx). Cyclopus was tested on a set of 120 mammograms on which the two compared commercial systems had been previously tested. The set consisted of mammograms reported as negative, preceding 31 interval cancers reviewed as screening error or minimal sign, and of 89 verified negative controls randomly selected from the same screening database. Cyclopus sensitivity was 74.1% (R2=54.8%; CADx=41.9%) and was higher for interval cancers reviewed as screening error (90.9%; R2=54.5%; CADx=81.8%) compared with those reviewed as minimal sign (65.0%; R2=55.0%; CADx=20.0%). Specificity was 15.7% (R2=29.2%; CADx=17.9%). Overall accuracy was 30.8% (R2=35.8%; CADx=24.1%). The positive predictive value of a case with CAD marks [regions of interest (ROI)] was 23.4% (23/98; R2=16.0%; CADx=15.1%). Average ROI number per view among negative controls was 1.13 (R2=0.93; CADx=0.99). Cyclopus was more sensitive for masses compared with isolated microcalcifications (208 vs 62 ROI; R2=90 vs 213; CADx=192 vs 130). Compared with two other commercial systems, Cyclopus was more sensitive (R2 p=0.14; CADx p=0.02) and less specific (R2 p=0.02; CADx p=0.64).
引用
收藏
页码:626 / 635
页数:10
相关论文
共 31 条
  • [21] Comparison of the accuracy of implant placement using different drilling systems for static computer-assisted implant surgery: A simulation-based experimental study
    Sittikornpaiboon, Paknisa
    Arunjaroensuk, Sirida
    Kaboosaya, Boosana
    Subbalekha, Keskanya
    Mattheos, Nikos
    Pimkhaokham, Atiphan
    CLINICAL IMPLANT DENTISTRY AND RELATED RESEARCH, 2021, 23 (04) : 635 - 643
  • [22] Accuracy in orthognathic surgery-comparison of preoperative plan and postoperative outcome using computer-assisted two-dimensional cephalometry by the Onyx Ceph® system
    Legal, Stefan
    Moralis, Antonios
    Waiss, Waltraud
    Zeman, Florian
    Winkler, Cornelia
    Mueller, Steffen
    Reichert, Torsten E.
    Proff, Peter
    Meier, Johannes
    Klingelhoeffer, Christoph
    Gosau, Martin
    Ettl, Tobias
    JOURNAL OF CRANIO-MAXILLOFACIAL SURGERY, 2018, 46 (10) : 1793 - 1799
  • [23] Comparison of precision of implant placement between two different guided systems for static computer-assisted implant surgery: A simulation-based experimental study
    Pattanasirikun, Papon
    Arunjaroensuk, Sirida
    Panya, Sappasith
    Subbalekha, Keskanya
    Mattheos, Nikos
    Pimkhaokham, Atiphan
    JOURNAL OF DENTAL SCIENCES, 2024, 19 : S38 - S43
  • [24] Comparison of Implant Placement Accuracy in Healed and Fresh Extraction Sockets between Static and Dynamic Computer-Assisted Implant Surgery Navigation Systems: A Model-Based Evaluation
    Wang, Miaozhen
    Rausch-Fan, Xiaohui
    Zhan, Yalin
    Shen, Huidan
    Liu, Feng
    MATERIALS, 2022, 15 (08)
  • [25] Comparison of the accuracy of implant position for two-implants supported fixed dental prosthesis using static and dynamic computer-assisted implant surgery: A randomized controlled clinical trial
    Yimarj, Paweena
    Subbalekha, Keskanya
    Dhanesuan, Kanit
    Siriwatana, Kiti
    Mattheos, Nikos
    Pimkhaokham, Atiphan
    CLINICAL IMPLANT DENTISTRY AND RELATED RESEARCH, 2020, 22 (06) : 672 - 678
  • [26] Accuracy of static computer-assisted implant placement in anterior and posterior sites by clinicians new to implant dentistry: in vitro comparison of fully guided, pilot-guided, and freehand protocols
    Abduo, Jaafar
    Lau, Douglas
    INTERNATIONAL JOURNAL OF IMPLANT DENTISTRY, 2020, 6 (01)
  • [27] Accuracy of static computer-assisted implant placement in anterior and posterior sites by clinicians new to implant dentistry: in vitro comparison of fully guided, pilot-guided, and freehand protocols
    Jaafar Abduo
    Douglas Lau
    International Journal of Implant Dentistry, 6
  • [28] Treatment outcome in orthognathic surgery-A prospective randomized blinded case-controlled comparison of planning accuracy in computer-assisted two- and three-dimensional planning techniques (part II)
    Bengtsson, Martin
    Wall, Gert
    Greiff, Lennart
    Rasmusson, Lars
    JOURNAL OF CRANIO-MAXILLOFACIAL SURGERY, 2017, 45 (09) : 1419 - 1424
  • [29] Accuracy of keyless vs drill-key implant systems for static computer-assisted implant surgery using two guide-hole designs compared to freehand implant placement: an in vitro study
    Raabe, Clemens
    Schuetz, Tabea S.
    Chappuis, Vivianne
    Yilmaz, Burak
    Abou-Ayash, Samir
    Couso-Queiruga, Emilio
    INTERNATIONAL JOURNAL OF IMPLANT DENTISTRY, 2023, 9 (01) : 4
  • [30] Accuracy of keyless vs drill-key implant systems for static computer-assisted implant surgery using two guide-hole designs compared to freehand implant placement: an in vitro study
    Clemens Raabe
    Tabea S. Schuetz
    Vivianne Chappuis
    Burak Yilmaz
    Samir Abou-Ayash
    Emilio Couso-Queiruga
    International Journal of Implant Dentistry, 9