HOME HELP FEEDBACK SUBSCRIPTIONS ARCHIVE SEARCH TABLE OF CONTENTS		QUICK SEARCH:   [advanced] Author: Keyword(s): Year:  Vol:  Page:

This Article Figures Only Full Text Full Text (PDF) Alert me when this article is cited Alert me if a correction is posted Citation Map Services Email this article to a friend Similar articles in this journal Similar articles in PubMed Alert me to new issues of the journal Download to citation manager Citing Articles Citing Articles via Google Scholar Google Scholar Articles by Zheng, B. Articles by Gur, D. Search for Related Content PubMed PubMed Citation Articles by Zheng, B. Articles by Gur, D. Social Bookmarking                      What's this?

Performance and Reproducibility of a Computerized Mass Detection Scheme for Digitized Mammography Using Rotated and Resampled Images: An Assessment

Department of Radiology, University of Pittsburgh, 300 Halket St., Ste. 4200, Pittsburgh, PA 15213-3180.

OBJECTIVE. Our objective was to compare the performance and reproducibility of a computer-aided detection (CAD) scheme that uses multiple rotated and resampled images with an in-house-developed CAD scheme (single-image-based) and a commercial CAD product in detecting masses depicted on digitized mammograms.

MATERIALS AND METHODS. Ninety-two film mammograms (acquired from 23 patients) were selected. Forty-four mass regions associated with malignancy were visually identified. A commercial CAD system was used to scan and process each image four times, for a total of 368 digitized images depicting 176 mass regions. Images were processed using two CAD schemes developed in our laboratory. One uses the detection results generated from a single image, and the other averages five detection scores generated after processing the originally digitized image and four slightly rotated and resampled images. A region-based analysis was used to compare reproducibility and performance levels among the two in-house schemes and the commercial system.

RESULTS. The commercial system detected a total of 98 mass regions (55.7% sensitivity) and 136 false-positive regions (an average of 0.37 per image). Among the detected mass regions, 76 represented 19 regions that were detected on all four scans and 22 represented 10 regions that were not fully reproducible. Eighty-eight false-positive detections represented 22 reproducible detections on all four scans. Our single-image-based scheme identified 87 mass regions and 160 false-positive regions. Seventeen mass regions and 28 false-positive regions were detected on all four scans. The multiple-image-based scheme identified 98 mass regions and 132 false-positive regions. Twenty-three mass regions were detected on all four scans. One hundred twelve of the 132 false-positive regions represented 28 reproducible detections.

CONCLUSION. Averaging detection scores from multiple rotated and resampled images generated from a single digitization of a film can reduce variations in detection scores. Our multiple-image-based scheme improved both performance and reproducibility over the single-image-based scheme. The multiple-image-based scheme yielded an overall performance comparable to that of the commercial system but with improved reproducibility.

CiteULike    Complore    Connotea    Del.icio.us    Digg    Reddit    Technorati    What's this?