DOI QR코드

DOI QR Code

Convergence of the Image Evaluation by BI-RADS Classification in Accordance with Algorithms in DR Mammography

디지털 유방촬영술에서 BI-RADS의 구분에 따른 알고리즘별 영상의 융복합적 평가

  • Lee, Mi-Hwa (Dept. of Health Care, Hanseo University, Dept. of Radiology, Kyung Hee University Hospital at GANGDONG)
  • 이미화 (한서대학교 보건의료학과, 강동경희대학교병원 영상의학과)
  • Received : 2015.06.19
  • Accepted : 2015.09.20
  • Published : 2015.09.28

Abstract

Image availability evaluated by the degree of agreement and sensitive using the process improve visualization according to the Algorithm modification in Image Post-Processing. Reliability measured by the Breast Imaging Reporting and Data System. 172 patients visit same period divided by BI-RADS, category five stages, and contents of breast parenchyma into Calcification, Nodule and Mass. Evaluated the TE/PV image reliability, visualization sensitive, agreement of diagnosis. Convergence analysis was an in various fields. According to the result of this research, PV has higher sensitive and accuracy about lesions than TE visual and there is a difference insensitive by contents of breast parenchyma. Therefore, practical use of Algorithm Modification(Tissue Equalization: TE, Premium View: PV) is expected to improve more accurate, useful diagnosis, which has not been easy until now.

Keywords

BI-RADS;Algorithm;Category;Sensitivity;Accuracy;Convergence

References

  1. American College of Radiology. BI-RADS: mammography. In: Breast imaging reporting and data system: BI-RADS atlas. 4th ed. Reston, VA: American College of Radiology, 2003.
  2. Kopans D, D'Orsi C."ACR system enhances mammography reporting". Diagn Imaging (San Franc), Vol.14,pp.125-132,1992.
  3. American College of Radiology. Breast imaging and reporting system-ultrasound (BI-RADS). 4th ed. Reston: American College of Radiology; 2003.
  4. Youn Jeong Kim,"Categorization and Evaluation of Usefulness of Breast Lesions with using Ultrasound BI-RADS",J Korean Radiol Soc,Vol.54,pp.313-318, 2006. https://doi.org/10.3348/jkrs.2006.54.4.313
  5. Seokyoon Choi,"Denoising of Digital Mammography Images Using Wavelet Transform", J Korean Radiol Soc, Vol.7,No.3.pp.181-189, 2013. https://doi.org/10.7742/jksr.2013.7.3.181
  6. Kolb T.M. ; Lichy J. ; Mercado C. ; Koenigsberg T. ; Brown M. ; New-House J.H. "A Novel Post-processing Algorithm for Digital Mammography: Effect on Conspicuity, Sensitivity, Speed and Confidence", columbia Prebyterian Medical Center, New York.
  7. Williams MB, Raghunathan P, More MJ, et al. "Optimization of exposure parameters in full field digital mammography". Med Phys. Vol.35, pp.2414-2423, 2008. https://doi.org/10.1118/1.2912177
  8. Pisano ED, Chandramouli J, Hemminger BM, et al. "The effect of intensity windowing on the detection of simulated masses embedded in dense portions of digitized mammograms in a laboratory setting". J Digit Imag.Vol.10, pp.174-82, 1997. https://doi.org/10.1007/BF03168840
  9. Pisano ED, Chandramouli J, Hemminger BM, et al. "Does intensity windowing improve the detection of simulated calcifications in dense mammograms?". J Digit Imag, Vol.10, pp.:79-84, 1997. https://doi.org/10.1007/BF03168559
  10. Cole EB, Pisano ED, Kistner EO, et al. "Diagnostic accuracy of digital mammography in patients with dense breasts who underwent problem-solving mammography effects of image processing and lesion type". Radiology. Vol.226, pp.153-60. 2003. https://doi.org/10.1148/radiol.2261012024
  11. Liberman L, Abramson AF, Squires FB, Glassman JR, Morris EA, Dershaw DD."The Breast Imaging Reporting and Data System: positive predictive value of mammographic features and final assessment categories". AJR Am J Roentgenol. Vol.171, pp.35-40, 1998. https://doi.org/10.2214/ajr.171.1.9648759
  12. Berube M, Curpen B, Ugolini P, Lalonde L, Ouimet-Oliva D."Level of suspicion of a mammographic lesion: use of features defined by BI-RADS lexicon and correlation with large-core breast biopsy", Can Assoc Radiol J. Vol.49,pp.223-228,1998.
  13. Orel SG, Kay N, Reynolds C, Sullivan DC."BI-RADS categorization as a predictor of malignancy". Radiology. Vol.211, pp.845-850, 1999. https://doi.org/10.1148/radiology.211.3.r99jn31845
  14. Tan YY, Wee SB, Tan MP, Chong BK."Positive predictive value of BI-RADS categorization in an asian population". Asian J Surg Vol.27, pp.186-191, 2004. https://doi.org/10.1016/S1015-9584(09)60030-0
  15. Shtern F."Digital mammography and related technologies: a perspective from the National Cancer Institute". Radiology, Vol.183, pp.629-630, 1992. https://doi.org/10.1148/radiology.183.3.1584908
  16. Nariya Cho, Joo Hee Cha, Woo Kyung Moon,"Digital Mammography", J Korean Radiol Soc, Vol.52, pp.225-231, 2005. https://doi.org/10.3348/jkrs.2005.52.4.225
  17. Byng JW, Boyd NF, Fishell E, Jong RA, Yaffe MJ."The quantitative analysis of mammographic densities". Phys Med Biol, Vol.39, pp.1629-1638, 1994. https://doi.org/10.1088/0031-9155/39/10/008
  18. Warren Burhenne LJ, Wood S, D'Orsi C, Feig SA, Kopans DB, O'Shaughnessy KF, et al."Potential contribution of computer-aided detection to the sensitivity of screening mammography". Radiology, Vol.215, pp.554-562, 2000. https://doi.org/10.1148/radiology.215.2.r00ma15554
  19. Lewin JM, D'Orsi CJ, Hendrick RE, Moss LJ, Isaacs PK, Karellas A, et al. Clinical comparison of full-field digital mammography for detection of breast cancer. AJR Am J Roentgenol Vol.179, pp.671-677,2002. https://doi.org/10.2214/ajr.179.3.1790671