A Comparative Study of Conventional Mammography Film Interpretations with Soft Copy Readings of the Same Examinations

Gitlin, Joseph N.; Narayan, Anand K.; Mitchell, C. A.; Akmal, Ali M.; Eisner, David; Peterson, Lindsy M.; Nie, Daisy; McClintock, Tyler R.

doi:10.1007/s10278-006-1046-1

Cited by 11 publications

(13 citation statements)

References 19 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…In addition, these results are in agreement with our previous evaluation of displays (also including a medical-grade grayscale display) using images obtained with CR [17], as well as the evaluation of capture devices (including standard CR) visualized using a medical-grade grayscale display. Previous studies have compared film-screen mammography to digitized films [9][10][11], and similar to the present study, these reports found no significant differences in diagnostic accuracy. In our study, we obtained AUC mean values that were similar to the values reported by Powell [9], Gitlin et al [10], and Pisano et al [11].…”

Section: Discussionsupporting

confidence: 89%

“…Previous studies have compared film-screen mammography to digitized films [9][10][11], and similar to the present study, these reports found no significant differences in diagnostic accuracy. In our study, we obtained AUC mean values that were similar to the values reported by Powell [9], Gitlin et al [10], and Pisano et al [11]. However, these previous studies did not evaluate digital cameras and low-cost displays.…”

Section: Discussionsupporting

confidence: 89%

“…The standard for a positive case was a malignant lesion confirmed by biopsy within 2 years of the initial mammography screening, corresponding to BI-RADS category 4 or 5 [6,10,24]. Negative cases were defined as those without any lesions confirmed by biopsy or cases with normal follow-up mammograms for 1 year, corresponding to BI-RADS category 2 or 3.…”

Section: Sample Standard and Readersmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…Specialized equipment is available for digitizing mammogram films, and several studies have confirmed their clinical equivalence to film-screen mammography [9][10][11]. However, similar to CR, these specialized digitizers also remain unaffordable for rural areas in developing countries, and digital cameras are therefore being utilized for teleradiology services.…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

See 3 more Smart Citations

Evaluation of Low-Cost Telemammography Screening Configurations: A Comparison with Film-Screen Readings in Vulnerable Areas

et al. 2014

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

The aim of this study was to evaluate the diagnostic accuracy for detecting breast cancer using different telemammography configurations, including combinations of both low-cost capture devices and consumer-grade color displays. At the same time, we compared each of these configurations to film-screen readings. This study used a treatment-by-reader-by-case factorial design. The sample included 70 mammograms with 34 malignant cases. The readers consisted of four radiologists who classified all of the cases according to the categories defined by the Breast Imaging Reporting and Data System (BI-RADS). The evaluated capture devices included a specialized film digitizer and a digital camera, and the evaluated displays included liquid crystal display (LCD) and light-emitting diode (LED) consumer-grade color displays. Receiver operating characteristic curves, diagnostic accuracy (measured as the area under these curves), accuracy of the composition classification, sensitivity, specificity, and the degree of agreement between readers in the detection of malignant cases were also evaluated. Comparisons of diagnostic accuracy between film-screen and the different combinations of digital configurations showed no significant differences for nodules, calcifications, and asymmetries. In addition, no differences were observed in terms of sensibility or specificity when the degree of malignancy using the film-screen method was compared to that provided with digital configurations. Similar results were observed for the classification of breast composition. Furthermore, all observed reader agreements of malignant detection between film-screen and digital configurations were substantial. These findings indicate that the evaluated digital devices showed comparable diagnostic accuracy to the reference treatment (film-screen).

show abstract

Section: Discussionsupporting

confidence: 89%

Section: Discussionsupporting

confidence: 89%

Section: Sample Standard and Readersmentioning

confidence: 99%

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

See 2 more Smart Citations

Evaluation of Low-Cost Telemammography Screening Configurations: A Comparison with Film-Screen Readings in Vulnerable Areas

et al. 2014

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…We hope this study will contribute to the broader use of teleradiology in developing countries. Several studies have been undertaken to compare the diagnostic accuracy of conventional plain X-ray interpretation with each of the following devices: film digitizers, [3][4][5][6] flatbed scanners, digital cameras, [7][8][9] combinations of these devices 10,11 and alternative modalities such as computed radiography (CR). [12][13][14] Chest X-rays are among the most difficult radiographs to read and usually represent a large proportions of examinations 6 ; therefore, they have been used in many of these studies for assessing sensitivity or specificity.…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Comparison Between Differently Priced Devices for Digital Capture of X-Ray Films Using Computed Tomography as a Gold Standard: A Multireader-Multicase Receiver Operating Characteristic Curve Study

Salazar

Camacho²,

Aguirre³

2011

Telemedicine and e-Health

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Objective: Film digitizers are a specialized technology that is available for scanning X-ray radiographs; however, their cost makes them unaffordable for developing countries. Thus, less expensive alternatives are used. The purpose of this study was to compare three devices for digital capture of X-ray films: a film digitizer (US $15,000), a flatbed scanner (US $1800), and a 10-megapixel digital camera (US $450), in terms of diagnostic accuracy, defined as the area under the receiver operating characteristic curves and computed tomography as the gold standard. Materials and Methods: The sample included 136 chest X-ray cases with computed tomography confirmation of the presence or absence of pneumothorax, interstitial opacities, or nodules. The readers were six radiologists who made observations of eight variables for each digital capture of the X-ray films: three main variables to determine the accuracy in the detection of the above-mentioned pathologies, four secondary variables to categorize other pathological classifications, and one variable regarding digital image quality. Results: The receiver operating characteristic curves for each device and pathology were very similar. For the main variables, there was no significant statistical difference in diagnostic accuracy between the devices. For the secondary variables, > 84% of cases were correctly classified, even those that were classified with the lowest image quality. High accuracy was determined for the three main variables (0.75 to 0.96), indicating good performance for all tested devices, despite their very different prices. Conclusions: Choosing a device for a teleradiology service should involve additional factors, such as capture time, maintenance concerns, and training requirements.

show abstract

Diagnostic performance of detecting breast cancer on computed radiographic (CR) mammograms: comparison of hard copy film, 3-megapixel liquid-crystal-display (LCD) monitor and 5-megapixel LCD monitor

Yamada

Suzuki

Uchiyama³

et al. 2008

Eur Radiol

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

The purpose was to compare observer performance in the detection of breast cancer using hard-copy film, and 3-megapixel (3-MP) and 5-megapixel (5-MP) liquid crystal display (LCD) monitors in a simulated screening setting. We amassed 100 sample sets, including 32 patients with surgically proven breast cancer (masses present, N = 12; microcalcifications, N = 10; other types, N = 10) and 68 normal controls. All the mammograms were obtained using computed radiography (CR; sampling pitch of 50 mum). Twelve mammographers independently assessed CR mammograms presented in random order for hard-copy and soft-copy reading at minimal 4-week intervals. Observers rated the images on seven-point (1 to 7) and continuous (0 to 100) malignancy scales. Receiver-operating-characteristics analysis was performed, and the average area under the curve (AUC) was calculated for each modality. The jackknife method with the Bonferroni correction was applied to multireader/multicase analysis. The average AUC values for the 3-MP LCD, 5-MP LCD, and hard-copy film were 0.954, 0.947, and 0.956 on the seven-point scale and 0.943, 0.923, and 0.944 on the continuous scale, respectively. There were no significant differences among the three modalities on either scale. Soft-copy reading using 3-MP and 5-MP LCDs is comparable to hard-copy reading for detecting breast cancer.

show abstract

A Comparative Study of Conventional Mammography Film Interpretations with Soft Copy Readings of the Same Examinations

Cited by 11 publications

References 19 publications

Evaluation of Low-Cost Telemammography Screening Configurations: A Comparison with Film-Screen Readings in Vulnerable Areas

Evaluation of Low-Cost Telemammography Screening Configurations: A Comparison with Film-Screen Readings in Vulnerable Areas

Comparison Between Differently Priced Devices for Digital Capture of X-Ray Films Using Computed Tomography as a Gold Standard: A Multireader-Multicase Receiver Operating Characteristic Curve Study

Diagnostic performance of detecting breast cancer on computed radiographic (CR) mammograms: comparison of hard copy film, 3-megapixel liquid-crystal-display (LCD) monitor and 5-megapixel LCD monitor

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About