Application of computer-aided diagnosis in breast ultrasound interpretation: improvements in diagnostic performance according to reader experience.
- Author:
Ji Hye CHOI
1
;
Bong Joo KANG
;
Ji Eun BAEK
;
Hyun Sil LEE
;
Sung Hun KIM
Author Information
- Publication Type:Original Article
- Keywords: Ultrasonography; Breast neoplasms; Diagnosis, computer-assisted
- MeSH: Breast Neoplasms; Breast*; Diagnosis*; Diagnosis, Computer-Assisted; Information Systems; Sensitivity and Specificity; Ultrasonography*
- From: Ultrasonography 2018;37(3):217-225
- CountryRepublic of Korea
- Language:English
- Abstract: PURPOSE: The purpose of this study was to evaluate the usefulness of applying computer-aided diagnosis (CAD) to breast ultrasound (US), depending on the reader's experience with breast imaging. METHODS: Between October 2015 and January 2016, two experienced readers obtained and analyzed the grayscale US images of 200 cases according to the Breast Imaging Reporting and Data System (BI-RADS) lexicon and categories. They additionally applied CAD (S-Detect) to analyze the lesions and made a diagnostic decision subjectively, based on grayscale US with CAD. For the same cases, two inexperienced readers analyzed the grayscale US images using the BI-RADS lexicon and categories, added CAD, and came to a subjective diagnostic conclusion. We then compared the diagnostic performance depending on the reader's experience with breast imaging. RESULTS: The sensitivity values for the experienced readers, inexperienced readers, and CAD (for experienced and inexperienced readers) were 91.7%, 75.0%, 75.0%, and 66.7%, respectively. The specificity values for the experienced readers, inexperienced readers, and CAD (for experienced and inexperienced readers) were 76.6%, 71.8%, 78.2%, and 76.1%, respectively. When diagnoses were made subjectively in combination with CAD, the specificity significantly improved (76.6% to 80.3%) without a change in the sensitivity (91.7%) in the experienced readers. After subjective combination with CAD, both of the sensitivity and specificity improved in the inexperienced readers (75.0% to 83.3% and 71.8% to 77.1%). In addition, the area under the curve improved for both the experienced and inexperienced readers (0.84 to 0.86 and 0.73 to 0.80) after the addition of CAD. CONCLUSION: CAD is more useful for less experienced readers. Combining CAD with breast US led to improved specificity for both experienced and inexperienced readers.
