University of Texas Health Sciences Center, San Antonio, 6522 Camp Bullis Road, #5208, San Antonio, TX, 78256, USA.
Department of Diagnostic Imaging, Fleury Medicina e Saúde, Rua Cincinato Braga 232, São Paulo, Brazil, 01333-910.
Eur Radiol. 2017 Oct;27(10):4307-4315. doi: 10.1007/s00330-017-4835-7. Epub 2017 Apr 10.
We assessed multiple readers' positive predictive values (PPVs) for ACR BI-RADS 3, 4a, 4b, 4c and 5 masses on ultrasound (US) pre- and post-proposed guidelines.
This retrospective, IRB-approved study included four American and four non-American readers who assigned BI-RADS categories for US images of 374 biopsy-proved masses. Readers were offered guidelines and re-classified the masses. We assessed readers' abilities to achieve ACR benchmarks BI-RADS categories pre- and post-guidelines.
PPVs increased with BI-RADS category. The PPVs pre- and post-guidelines were 6.0% and 4.4% for category 3, 27.3% and 30.5% for category 4a, 49.9% and 51.5% for category 4b, 69.0% and 67.4% for category 4c, and 79.3% and 80.1% for category 5. Readers achieved the PPV benchmark for category 4c, but not for categories 3, 4a, 4b and 5, with no significant improvement after guidelines. Regular BI-RADS 4 subcategory users missed benchmarks by less than non-regular users.
Pre- and post-guidelines, readers' PPVs increased with BI-RADS categories, ACR PPV benchmarks were achieved in category 4c, missed in other categories, especially in the critical 4a subcategory, where the PPV was too high. BI-RADS 4 subcategory users performed better than non-users.
• Readers failed to achieve benchmarks for BI-RADS 4 subcategories, especially 4a. • USA and Brazilian readers performed similarly in ACR BI-RADS 4 subcategorization. • Proposed guidelines did not improve overall, USA or Brazilian reader performance. • Regularly BI-RADS 4 subcategory users performed better than did non-users. • US features distinguished between benign and malignant, not BI-RADS 4 subcategories.
我们评估了多位读者在超声(US)检查前和根据新建议指南应用后对 ACR BI-RADS 3、4a、4b、4c 和 5 类肿块的阳性预测值(PPV)。
本回顾性研究经机构审查委员会批准,纳入了四位美国和四位非美国读者,他们对 374 例经活检证实的肿块的 US 图像进行了 BI-RADS 分类。读者提供了指南,并重新对肿块进行了分类。我们评估了读者在指南前后达到 ACR BI-RADS 分类标准的能力。
PPV 随 BI-RADS 类别增加而增加。指南前后的 PPV 为:3 类为 6.0%和 4.4%,4a 类为 27.3%和 30.5%,4b 类为 49.9%和 51.5%,4c 类为 69.0%和 67.4%,5 类为 79.3%和 80.1%。读者达到了 4c 类的 PPV 标准,但未达到 3、4a、4b 和 5 类的标准,应用指南后无显著改善。常规使用 BI-RADS 4 亚类的读者的漏诊率低于非常规使用者。
在指南前后,读者的 PPV 随 BI-RADS 类别增加而增加,在 4c 类达到了 ACR 的 PPV 标准,但在其他类别,尤其是在关键的 4a 亚类,PPV 过高而未达到标准。BI-RADS 4 亚类使用者的表现优于非使用者。
读者未能达到 BI-RADS 4 亚类别的标准,尤其是 4a 亚类。
美国和巴西读者在 ACR BI-RADS 4 亚类别的分类中表现相似。
新建议的指南并未整体提高,美国或巴西读者的表现。
常规使用 BI-RADS 4 亚类别的读者表现优于非使用者。
US 特征可区分良恶性,而非 BI-RADS 4 亚类。