Colonic polyps: application value of computer-aided detection in computed tomographic colonography.
- Author:
Hui-Mao ZHANG
1
;
Wei GUO
;
Gui-Feng LIU
;
Dong-Hong AN
;
Shuo-Hui GAO
;
Li-Bo SUN
;
Hai-Shan YANG
Author Information
- Publication Type:Journal Article
- MeSH: Adult; Aged; Colonic Polyps; diagnosis; diagnostic imaging; Colonography, Computed Tomographic; methods; Female; Humans; Male; Middle Aged; Retrospective Studies; Sensitivity and Specificity; Young Adult
- From: Chinese Medical Journal 2011;124(3):380-384
- CountryChina
- Language:English
-
Abstract:
BACKGROUNDColonic polyps are frequently encountered in clinics. Computed tomographic colonography (CTC), as a painless and quick detection, has high values in clinics. In this study, we evaluated the application value of computer-aided detection (CAD) in CTC detection of colonic polyps in the Chinese population.
METHODSCTC was performed with a GE 64-row multidetector computed tomography (MDCT) scanner. Data of 50 CTC patients (39 patients positive for at least one polyp of ≥ 0.5 cm in size and the other 11 patients negative by endoscopic detection) were retrospectively reviewed first without computer-aided detection (CAD) and then with CAD by four radiologists (two were experienced and another two inexperienced) blinded to colonoscopy findings. The sensitivity, specificity, positive predictive value, negative predictive value, and accuracy of detected colonic polyps, as well as the areas under the ROC curves (Az value) with and without CAD were calculated.
RESULTSCAD increased the overall sensitivity, specificity, positive predictive value, negative predictive value and accuracy of the colonic polyps detected by experienced and inexperienced readers. The sensitivity in detecting small polyps (5 - 9 mm) with CAD in experienced and inexperienced readers increased from 82% and 44% to 93% and 82%, respectively (P > 0.05 and P < 0.001). With the use of CAD, the overall false positive rate and false negative rate for the detection of polyps by experienced and inexperienced readers decreased in different degrees. Among 13 sessile polyps not detected by CAD, two were ≥ 1.0 cm, eleven were 5 - 9 mm in diameter, and nine were flat-shaped lesions.
CONCLUSIONSThe application of CAD in combination with CTC can increase the ability to detect colonic polyps, particularly for inexperienced readers. However, CAD is of limited value for the detection of flat polyps.