A PHP Error was encountered

Severity: Warning

Message: file_get_contents(https://...@pubfacts.com&api_key=b8daa3ad693db53b1410957c26c9a51b4908&a=1): Failed to open stream: HTTP request failed! HTTP/1.1 429 Too Many Requests

Filename: helpers/my_audit_helper.php

Line Number: 176

Backtrace:

File: /var/www/html/application/helpers/my_audit_helper.php
Line: 176
Function: file_get_contents

File: /var/www/html/application/helpers/my_audit_helper.php
Line: 250
Function: simplexml_load_file_from_url

File: /var/www/html/application/helpers/my_audit_helper.php
Line: 3122
Function: getPubMedXML

File: /var/www/html/application/controllers/Detail.php
Line: 575
Function: pubMedSearch_Global

File: /var/www/html/application/controllers/Detail.php
Line: 489
Function: pubMedGetRelatedKeyword

File: /var/www/html/index.php
Line: 316
Function: require_once

The diagnostic performance of ultrasound computer-aided diagnosis system for distinguishing breast masses: a prospective multicenter study. | LitMetric

Objectives: To evaluate the diagnostic value of computer-aided diagnosis (CAD) software on ultrasound in distinguishing benign and malignant breast masses and avoiding unnecessary biopsy.

Methods: This prospective, multicenter study included patients who were scheduled for pathological diagnosis of breast masses between April 2019 and November 2020. Ultrasound images, videos, CAD analysis, and BI-RADS were obtained. The AUC, accuracy, sensitivity, specificity, PPV, and NPV were calculated and compared with radiologists.

Results: Overall, 901 breast masses in 901 patients were enrolled in this study. The accuracy, sensitivity, specificity, PPV and NPV of CAD software were 89.6%, 94.2%, 87.0%, 80.4%, and 96.3, respectively, in the long-axis section; 89.0%, 91.4%, 87.7%, 80.8%, and 94.7%, respectively, in the short-axis section. With BI-RADS 4a as the cut-off value, CAD software has a higher AUC (0.906 vs 0.734 vs 0.696, all p < 0.001) than both experienced and less experienced radiologists. With BI-RADS 4b as the cut-off value, CAD software showed better AUC than less experienced radiologists (0.906 vs 0.874, p < 0.001), but not superior to experienced radiologists (0.906 vs 0.883, p = 0.057). After the application of CAD software, the unnecessary biopsy rate of BI-RADS categories 4 and 5 was significantly decreased (33.0% vs 11.9%, 37.8% vs 14.5%), and the malignant rate of biopsy in category 4a was significantly increased (11.6% vs 40.7%, 7.4% vs 34.9%, all p < 0.001).

Conclusions: CAD software on ultrasound can be used as an effective auxiliary diagnostic tool for differential diagnosis of benign and malignant breast masses and reducing unnecessary biopsy.

Clinical Trial Registration: ClinicalTrials.gov (NCT03887598) KEY POINTS: • Prospective multicenter study showed that computer-aided diagnosis software provides greater diagnostic confidence for differentiating benign and malignant breast masses. • Computer-aided diagnosis software can help radiologists reduce unnecessary biopsy. • The management of patients with breast masses becomes more appropriate.

Download full-text PDF

Source
http://dx.doi.org/10.1007/s00330-021-08452-1DOI Listing

Publication Analysis

Top Keywords

breast masses
16
cad software
12
computer-aided diagnosis
8
prospective multicenter
8
multicenter study
8
accuracy sensitivity
8
sensitivity specificity
8
specificity ppv
8
ppv npv
8
diagnostic performance
4

Similar Publications

Want AI Summaries of new PubMed Abstracts delivered to your In-box?

Enter search terms and have AI summaries delivered each week - change queries or unsubscribe any time!