Performance of radiographers in the evaluation of CT colonographic images

被引:30
|
作者
Jensch, Sebastiaan
van Gelder, Rogier E.
Florie, Jasper
Thomassen-de Graaf, Marloes A.
Lobe, Jack V.
Bossuyt, Patrick M. M.
Bipat, Shandra
Nio, C. Yung
Stoker, Jaap
机构
[1] Univ Amsterdam, Acad Med Ctr, Dept Radiol, NL-1105 AZ Amsterdam, Netherlands
[2] Onze Lieve Vrouw Hosp, Dept Radiol, NL-1090 HM Amsterdam, Netherlands
[3] Univ Amsterdam, Acad Med Ctr, Dept Clin Epidemiol & Biostat, NL-1105 AZ Amsterdam, Netherlands
关键词
abdominal imaging; cancer; colon; CT colonography; double reading; gastrointestinal radiology; radiographer; screening; second reader;
D O I
10.2214/AJR.06.0451
中图分类号
R8 [特种医学]; R445 [影像诊断学];
学科分类号
1002 ; 100207 ; 1009 ;
摘要
OBJECTIVE. The purpose of this study was to compare the accuracy of radiographers with that of radiologists in the interpretation of CT colonographic images. MATERIALS AND METHODS. Four observers ( a radiologist, a radiologist in training, and two radiographers) evaluated 145 data sets using a primary 3D approach. The radiographers were part of our CT colonography work group and underwent training that consisted of 20 cases. The reference standard was optical colonoscopy with second-look colonoscopy for discrepant lesions >= 10 mm in diameter. Mean sensitivities per patient and per polyp stratified for size ( any size, >= 6 mm, and >= 10 mm) was determined for the radiologists and radiographers. Specificity was determined on a per-patient basis. RESULTS. At colonoscopy in 86 of 145 patients, a total of 317 polyps were found ( 60 polyps >= 6 mm in 26 patients and 31 polyps >= 10 mm in 18 patients). No statistically significant differences were found in detection rates between radiologists and radiographers. Sensitivities for patients with a lesion of any size (66% for radiologists vs 65% for radiographers), >= 6 mm ( 81% vs 87%), and >= 10 mm ( both 78%) were similar for all observers. On a per-polyp basis, detection rates were equivalent regardless of polyp size (47% vs 40%), for lesions >= 6 mm (71% vs 65%), and for lesions >= 10 mm (69% vs 66%). Mean specificities were similar among patients without lesions (31% vs 30%), patients without lesions >= 6 mm ( 71% vs 67%), and patients without lesions >= 10 mm (93% vs 93%). CONCLUSION. Radiographers with training in CT colonographic evaluation achieved sensitivity and specificity in polyp detection comparable with that of radiologists. Radiographers can be considered reviewers in the evaluation of CT colonographic images.
引用
收藏
页码:W249 / W255
页数:7
相关论文
共 50 条
  • [41] A quantitative evaluation of abdominal aorta aneurysm by CT images
    Park, Chan-Soo
    Park, Jong-Il
    Kim, Kwang-Gi
    Cho, Chang-No
    Ahn, Byung-Uk
    Jae, Hwan-Jun
    TECHNOLOGY AND HEALTH CARE, 2015, 23 (01) : 37 - 45
  • [42] Nodule detection performance in compressed chest CT images
    Feldman, U
    Judy, PF
    Seltzer, SE
    Topal, U
    Wester, C
    IMAGE PERCEPTION - MEDICAL IMAGING 1996, 1996, 2712 : 123 - 127
  • [43] Comparative evaluation of denoising methods on brain CT images
    Bhadauria, H. S.
    Dewal, M. L.
    INTERNATIONAL JOURNAL OF SIGNAL AND IMAGING SYSTEMS ENGINEERING, 2013, 6 (03) : 182 - 187
  • [44] Performance Comparison of Bone Segmentation on Dental CT Images
    Yampri, P.
    Sotthivirat, S.
    Gansawat, D.
    Koonsanit, K.
    Narkbuakaew, W.
    Areeprayolkij, W.
    Sinthupinyo, W.
    13TH INTERNATIONAL CONFERENCE ON BIOMEDICAL ENGINEERING, VOLS 1-3, 2009, 23 (1-3): : 665 - 668
  • [45] An Evaluation of Radiographers? Experience in Mammography: An Explanatory Study
    Albeshan, Salman
    Alashban, Yazeed
    Shubayr, Nasser
    Alkhudairy, Arwa
    Eliraqi, Fatma
    IRANIAN JOURNAL OF RADIOLOGY, 2022, 19 (02)
  • [46] UNet and MobileNet CNN-based model observers for CT protocol optimization: comparative performance evaluation by means of phantom CT images
    Valeri, Federico
    Bartolucci, Maurizio
    Cantoni, Elena
    Carpi, Roberto
    Cisbani, Evaristo
    Cupparo, Ilaria
    Doria, Sandra
    Gori, Cesare
    Grigioni, Mauro
    Lasagni, Lorenzo
    Marconi, Alessandro
    Mazzoni, Lorenzo Nicola
    Miele, Vittorio
    Pradella, Silvia
    Risaliti, Guido
    Sanguineti, Valentina
    Sona, Diego
    Vannucchi, Letizia
    Taddeucci, Adriana
    JOURNAL OF MEDICAL IMAGING, 2023, 10
  • [47] Performance of radiographers in mammogram interpretation: A systematic review
    van den Biggelaar, F. J. H. M.
    Nelemans, P. J.
    Flobbe, K.
    BREAST, 2008, 17 (01): : 85 - 90
  • [48] Radiographers' workload and burnout on performance: an empirical study
    Arif, Wejdan M.
    FRONTIERS IN PUBLIC HEALTH, 2024, 12
  • [49] Cph CT Toolbox: A Performance Evaluation
    Bardino, Jonas
    Rehr, Martin
    Vinter, Brian
    PROCEEDINGS OF THE 2015 INTERNATIONAL CONFERENCE ON HIGH PERFORMANCE COMPUTING & SIMULATION (HPCS 2015), 2015, : 35 - 46
  • [50] A NEW PHANTOM FOR EVALUATION OF CT PERFORMANCE
    KRIZ, RJ
    MEDICAL PHYSICS, 1984, 11 (03) : 379 - 379