Suppr超能文献

在实际乳腺筛查钼靶检查中有无人工智能辅助的诊断性能。

Diagnostic performance with and without artificial intelligence assistance in real-world screening mammography.

作者信息

Lee Si Eun, Hong Hanpyo, Kim Eun-Kyung

机构信息

Department of Radiology, Yongin Severance Hospital, Yonsei University College of Medicine, Yongin, Korea.

出版信息

Eur J Radiol Open. 2024 Jan 13;12:100545. doi: 10.1016/j.ejro.2023.100545. eCollection 2024 Jun.

Abstract

PURPOSE

To evaluate artificial intelligence-based computer-aided diagnosis (AI-CAD) for screening mammography, we analyzed the diagnostic performance of radiologists by providing and withholding AI-CAD results alternatively every month.

METHODS

This retrospective study was approved by the institutional review board with a waiver for informed consent. Between August 2020 and May 2022, 1819 consecutive women (mean age 50.8 ± 9.4 years) with 2061 screening mammography and ultrasound performed on the same day in a single institution were included. Radiologists interpreted screening mammography in clinical practice with AI-CAD results being provided or withheld alternatively by month. The AI-CAD results were retrospectively obtained for analysis even when withheld from radiologists. The diagnostic performances of radiologists and stand-alone AI-CAD were compared and the performances of radiologists with and without AI-CAD assistance were also compared by cancer detection rate, recall rate, sensitivity, specificity, accuracy and area under the receiver-operating-characteristics curve (AUC).

RESULTS

Twenty-nine breast cancer patients and 1790 women without cancers were included. Diagnostic performances of the radiologists did not significantly differ with and without AI-CAD assistance. Radiologists with AI-CAD assistance showed the same sensitivity (76.5%) and similar specificity (92.3% vs 93.8%), AUC (0.844 vs 0.851), and recall rates (8.8% vs. 7.4%) compared to standalone AI-CAD. Radiologists without AI-CAD assistance showed lower specificity (91.9% vs 94.6%) and accuracy (91.5% vs 94.1%) and higher recall rates (8.6% vs 5.9%, all p < 0.05) compared to stand-alone AI-CAD.

CONCLUSION

Radiologists showed no significant difference in diagnostic performance when both screening mammography and ultrasound were performed with or without AI-CAD assistance for mammography. However, without AI-CAD assistance, radiologists showed lower specificity and accuracy and higher recall rates compared to stand-alone AI-CAD.

摘要

目的

为评估基于人工智能的计算机辅助诊断(AI-CAD)在乳腺钼靶筛查中的应用,我们通过每月交替提供和不提供AI-CAD结果来分析放射科医生的诊断性能。

方法

本回顾性研究经机构审查委员会批准,豁免知情同意。2020年8月至2022年5月期间,纳入了在同一机构同一天进行2061次乳腺钼靶筛查和超声检查的1819名连续女性(平均年龄50.8±9.4岁)。放射科医生在临床实践中解读乳腺钼靶筛查结果,每月交替提供或不提供AI-CAD结果。即使未向放射科医生提供AI-CAD结果,也会对其进行回顾性分析以用于研究。比较了放射科医生和独立AI-CAD的诊断性能,并通过癌症检出率、召回率、敏感性、特异性、准确性和受试者操作特征曲线下面积(AUC)比较了有无AI-CAD辅助时放射科医生的性能。

结果

纳入了29例乳腺癌患者和1790例无癌症的女性。有无AI-CAD辅助时,放射科医生的诊断性能无显著差异。与独立AI-CAD相比,有AI-CAD辅助的放射科医生表现出相同的敏感性(76.5%)和相似的特异性(92.3%对93.8%)、AUC(0.844对0.851)和召回率(8.8%对7.4%)。与独立AI-CAD相比,无AI-CAD辅助的放射科医生表现出较低的特异性(91.9%对94.6%)和准确性(91.5%对94.1%)以及较高的召回率(8.6%对5.9%,所有p<0.05)。

结论

在乳腺钼靶筛查和超声检查中,有无AI-CAD辅助时,放射科医生的诊断性能无显著差异。然而,与独立AI-CAD相比,无AI-CAD辅助时,放射科医生表现出较低的特异性和准确性以及较高的召回率。

https://cdn.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/blobs/ef11/10825593/1be4f444c642/gr1.jpg

文献AI研究员

20分钟写一篇综述,助力文献阅读效率提升50倍。

立即体验

用中文搜PubMed

大模型驱动的PubMed中文搜索引擎

马上搜索

文档翻译

学术文献翻译模型,支持多种主流文档格式。

立即体验