Abdolell Mohamed, Tsuruda Kaitlyn, Lightfoot Christopher B, Barkova Eva, McQuaid Melanie, Caines Judy, Iles Sian E
Dalhousie University, Faculty of Medicine, Department of Diagnostic Radiology, 1276 South Park Street, Room 3212, Dickson Building, Halifax, Nova Scotia B3H 2Y9, Canada; Nova Scotia Health Authority, Department of Diagnostic Imaging, 1276 South Park Street, Room 3212, Dickson Building, Halifax, Nova Scotia B3H 2Y9, Canada.
Nova Scotia Health Authority , Department of Diagnostic Imaging, 1276 South Park Street, Room 3212, Dickson Building, Halifax, Nova Scotia B3H 2Y9, Canada.
J Med Imaging (Bellingham). 2016 Jan;3(1):011004. doi: 10.1117/1.JMI.3.1.011004. Epub 2015 Oct 30.
Discussions of percent breast density (PD) and breast cancer risk implicitly assume that visual assessments of PD are comparable between vendors despite differences in technology and display algorithms. This study examines the extent to which visual assessments of PD differ between mammograms acquired from two vendors. Pairs of "for presentation" digital mammography images were obtained from two mammography units for 146 women who had a screening mammogram on one vendor unit followed by a diagnostic mammogram on a different vendor unit. Four radiologists independently visually assessed PD from single left mediolateral oblique view images from the two vendors. Analysis of variance, intra-class correlation coefficients (ICC), scatter plots, and Bland-Altman plots were used to evaluate PD assessments between vendors. The mean radiologist PD for each image was used as a consensus PD measure. Overall agreement of the PD assessments was excellent between the two vendors with an ICC of 0.95 (95% confidence interval: 0.93 to 0.97). Bland-Altman plots demonstrated narrow upper and lower limits of agreement between the vendors with only a small bias (2.3 percentage points). The results of this study support the assumption that visual assessment of PD is consistent across mammography vendors despite vendor-specific appearances of "for presentation" images.
关于乳腺密度百分比（PD）与乳腺癌风险的讨论隐含地假设，尽管技术和显示算法存在差异，但不同供应商之间对PD的视觉评估具有可比性。本研究考察了从两个供应商获取的乳房X线照片之间，PD视觉评估的差异程度。从两个乳房X线摄影设备中获取了146名女性的“用于展示”的数字乳房X线照片对，这些女性先在一个供应商的设备上进行了筛查乳房X线摄影，随后在另一个不同供应商的设备上进行了诊断性乳房X线摄影。四名放射科医生独立地从两个供应商的单次左侧内外斜位视图图像中对PD进行视觉评估。采用方差分析、组内相关系数（ICC）、散点图和布兰德-奥特曼图来评估不同供应商之间的PD评估。将每位放射科医生对每张图像的平均PD用作共识性PD测量指标。两个供应商之间PD评估的总体一致性非常好，ICC为0.95（95%置信区间：0.93至0.97）。布兰德-奥特曼图显示，供应商之间的一致性上下限较窄，偏差仅为2.3个百分点。本研究结果支持以下假设：尽管“用于展示”的图像存在供应商特定的外观差异，但不同乳房X线摄影供应商对PD的视觉评估是一致的。
