Comparative performance of two polyp detection systems on CT colonography.

AJR Am J Roentgenol 2007 Aug;189(2):277-82

Department of Radiology, Mayo Clinic, 200 First St. SW, Rochester, MN 55905, USA.

Objective: The purpose of our study was to evaluate two current automatic polyp detection systems to determine their sensitivity and false-positive rate in patients who have undergone CT colonography and subsequent endoscopy.

Materials And Methods: We evaluated two polyp detection systems--Polyp Enhanced Viewing (PEV) and the Summers computer-aided detection (CAD) system (National Institutes of Health [NIH]) using a unique cohort of CT colonography examinations: 31 examinations with true-positive lesions identified by radiologists and 34 examinations with false-positive lesions incorrectly identified by radiologists. All patients had reference-standard colonoscopy within 7 days of CT. Candidate lesions were compared with the endoscopic reference standard and prospective radiologist interpretation. The sensitivity and false-positive rates were calculated for each system.

Results: The NIH system had a higher sensitivity than the PEV tool for polyps > or = 1 cm (22/23, 96%; 78-99%, 95% CI vs 14/23, 61%; 38-81%, 95% CI; p = 0.008, respectively). There was no significant difference in the detection of medium-sized polyps 6-9 mm in size (8/13 vs 6/13, p = 0.68, respectively). The PEV tool had an average of 1.18 false-positive detections per patient, whereas the NIH tool had an average of 5.20 false-positive detections per patient, with the PEV tool having significantly fewer false-positive detections in both patient groups (p < 0.001).

Conclusion: One polyp detection system tended to operate with a higher sensitivity, whereas the other tended to operate with a lower false-positive rate. Prospective trials using polyp detection systems as a primary or secondary means of CT colonography interpretation appear warranted.

Download full-text PDF

Source
http://dx.doi.org/10.2214/AJR.07.2289DOI Listing
August 2007

Publication Analysis

Top Keywords

polyp detection
20
detection systems
12
detections patient
12
false-positive detections
12
pev tool
12
higher sensitivity
8
tool average
8
tended operate
8
false-positive rate
8
sensitivity false-positive
8
identified radiologists
8
false-positive
7
detection
7
polyp
5
nih system
4
sensitivity pev
4
system higher
4
polyps 22/23
4
14/23 61%
4
61% 38-81%
4

Similar Publications