Effect of computer-aided detection as a second reader in multidetector-row CT colonography

Thomas Mang, Philipp Peloschek, Christina Plank, Andrea Maier, Anno Graser, Michael Weber, Christian Herold, Luca Bogoni, Wolfgang Schima

Research output: Contribution to journalArticlepeer-review

Abstract

Our purpose was to assess the effect of computer-aided detection (CAD) on lesion detection as a second reader in computed tomographic colonography, and to compare the influence of CAD on the performance of readers with different levels of expertise. Fifty-two CT colonography patient data-sets (37 patients: 55 endoscopically confirmed polyps ≥0.5 cm, seven cancers; 15 patients: no abnormalities) were retrospectively reviewed by four radiologists (two expert, two nonexpert). After primary data evaluation, a second reading augmented with findings of CAD (polyp-enhanced view, Siemens) was performed. Sensitivities and reading time were calculated for each reader without CAD and supported by CAD findings. The sensitivity of expert readers was 91% each, and of nonexpert readers, 76% and 75%, respectively, for polyp detection. CAD increased the sensitivity of expert readers to 96% (P=0.25) and 93% (P=1), and that of nonexpert readers to 91% (P=0.008) and 95% (P=0.001), respectively. All four readers diagnosed 100% of cancers, but CAD alone only 43%. CAD increased reading time by 2.1 min (mean). CAD as a second reader significantly improves sensitivity for polyp detection in a high disease prevalence population for nonexpert readers. CAD causes a modest increase in reading time. CAD is of limited value in the detection of cancer.

Original languageEnglish (US)
Pages (from-to)2598-2607
Number of pages10
JournalEuropean radiology
Volume17
Issue number10
DOIs
StatePublished - Oct 1 2007

Keywords

  • CT colonography
  • Colon cancer
  • Computer-aided detection
  • Polyp
  • Virtual endoscopy

ASJC Scopus subject areas

  • Radiology Nuclear Medicine and imaging

Fingerprint Dive into the research topics of 'Effect of computer-aided detection as a second reader in multidetector-row CT colonography'. Together they form a unique fingerprint.

Cite this