Department of Radiology, School of Medicine, Case Western Reserve University, Cleveland, USA.
J Digit Imaging. 2013 Aug;26(4):651-6. doi: 10.1007/s10278-012-9565-4.
This study aimed to compare the diagnostic effectiveness of computer-aided detection (CAD) software (OnGuard™ 5.2) in combination with hardware-based bone suppression (dual-energy subtraction radiography (DESR)), software-based bone suppression (SoftView™, version 2.4), and standard posteroanterior images with no bone suppression. A retrospective pilot study compared the diagnostic performance of two commercially available methods of bone suppression when used with commercially available CAD software. Chest images from 27 patients with computed tomography (CT) and pathology-proven malignant pulmonary nodules (8-34 mm) and 25 CT-negative patient controls were used for analysis. The Friedman, McNemar, and chi-square tests were used to compare diagnostic performance and the kappa statistic was used to evaluate method agreement. The average number of regions of interest and false-positives per image identified by CAD were not found to be significantly different regardless of the bone suppression methods evaluated. Similarly, the sensitivity, specificity, and test efficiency were not found to be significantly different. Agreement between the methods was between poor and excellent. The accuracy of CAD (OnGuard™, version 5.2) is not statistically different with either DESR or SoftView™ (version 2.4) bone suppression technology in digital chest images for pulmonary nodule identification. Low values for sensitivity (<80 %) and specificity (<50 %) may limit their utility for clinical radiology.
本研究旨在比较计算机辅助检测 (CAD) 软件(OnGuard™5.2)与基于硬件的骨抑制(双能减影射线照相术 (DESR))、基于软件的骨抑制(SoftView™,版本 2.4)以及无骨抑制的标准前后位图像联合应用时的诊断效能。一项回顾性试点研究比较了两种市售骨抑制方法与市售 CAD 软件联合应用时的诊断性能。分析了来自 27 名经 CT 和病理证实为恶性肺结节(8-34mm)的患者以及 25 名 CT 阴性的患者对照的 CT 图像。采用 Friedman、McNemar 和卡方检验比较诊断性能,采用 Kappa 统计评估方法一致性。无论评估哪种骨抑制方法,CAD 识别图像中每个感兴趣区域的平均数量和假阳性数量均无显著差异。同样,灵敏度、特异性和检测效率也无显著差异。这些方法之间的一致性介于较差和极好之间。在数字胸部图像中,用于肺结节识别的 CAD(OnGuard™,版本 5.2)的准确性与 DESR 或 SoftView™(版本 2.4)骨抑制技术无统计学差异。低灵敏度(<80%)和特异性(<50%)值可能限制其在临床放射学中的应用。