Universidade Federal de Goiás GoiâniaGO Brazil Universidade Federal de Goiás, Goiânia, GO, Brazil.
Rev Bras Ginecol Obstet. 2024 Mar 15;46. doi: 10.61622/rbgo/2024AO15. eCollection 2024.
To compare the medical image interpretation's time between the conventional and automated methods of breast ultrasound in patients with breast lesions. Secondarily, to evaluate the agreement between the two methods and interobservers.
This is a cross-sectional study with prospective data collection. The agreement's degrees were established in relation to the breast lesions's ultrasound descriptors. To determine the accuracy of each method, a biopsy of suspicious lesions was performed, considering the histopathological result as the diagnostic gold standard.
We evaluated 27 women. Conventional ultrasound used an average medical time of 10.77 minutes (± 2.55) greater than the average of 7.38 minutes (± 2.06) for automated ultrasound (p<0.001). The degrees of agreement between the methods ranged from 0.75 to 0.95 for researcher 1 and from 0.71 to 0.98 for researcher 2. Among the researchers, the degrees of agreement were between 0.63 and 1 for automated ultrasound and between 0.68 and 1 for conventional ultrasound. The area of the ROC curve for the conventional method was 0.67 (p=0.003) for researcher 1 and 0.72 (p<0.001) for researcher 2. The area of the ROC curve for the automated method was 0. 69 (p=0.001) for researcher 1 and 0.78 (p<0.001) for researcher 2.
We observed less time devoted by the physician to automated ultrasound compared to conventional ultrasound, maintaining accuracy. There was substantial or strong to perfect interobserver agreement and substantial or strong to almost perfect agreement between the methods.
比较传统与自动化乳腺超声在乳腺病变患者中的医学图像解读时间。其次,评估两种方法之间的一致性和观察者间的一致性。
这是一项前瞻性数据收集的横断面研究。与乳腺超声描述符有关,确定了一致性的程度。为了确定每种方法的准确性,对可疑病变进行了活检,以组织病理学结果作为诊断金标准。
我们评估了 27 名女性。传统超声的平均医疗时间为 10.77 分钟(±2.55),比自动化超声的平均 7.38 分钟(±2.06)长(p<0.001)。方法之间的一致性程度在研究人员 1 之间为 0.75 至 0.95,在研究人员 2 之间为 0.71 至 0.98。在研究人员中,自动超声的一致性程度在 0.63 到 1 之间,而传统超声的一致性程度在 0.68 到 1 之间。传统方法的 ROC 曲线下面积在研究人员 1 为 0.67(p=0.003),在研究人员 2 为 0.72(p<0.001)。自动方法的 ROC 曲线下面积在研究人员 1 为 0.69(p=0.001),在研究人员 2 为 0.78(p<0.001)。
与传统超声相比,我们观察到医生在自动化超声上花费的时间更少,同时保持了准确性。观察者间存在高度或极好的一致性,两种方法之间存在高度或极好的一致性。