首页> 外文期刊>Radiology >Comparing the diagnostic yields of technologists and radiologists in an invitational colorectal cancer screening program performed with CT colonography
【24h】

Comparing the diagnostic yields of technologists and radiologists in an invitational colorectal cancer screening program performed with CT colonography

机译:在CT结肠造影术的邀请性大肠癌筛查计划中比较技术人员和放射线医生的诊断结果

获取原文
获取原文并翻译 | 示例
       

摘要

Purpose: To compare the diagnostic yields of a radiologist and trained technologists in the detection of advanced neoplasia within a population-based computed tomographic (CT) colonography screening program. Materials and Methods: Ethical approval was obtained from the Dutch Health Council, and written informed consent was obtained from all participants. Nine hundred eighty-two participants (507 men, 475 women) underwent low-dose CT colonography after noncathartic bowel preparation (iodine tagging) between July 13, 2009, and January 21, 2011. Each scan was evaluated by one of three experienced radiologists (≥800 examinations) by using primary two-dimensional (2D) reading followed by secondary computer-aided detection (CAD) and by two of four trained technologists (≥200 examinations, with colonoscopic verification) by using primary 2D reading followed by three-dimensional analysis and CAD. Immediate colonoscopy was recommended for participants with lesions measuring at least 10 mm, and surveillance was recommended for participants with lesions measuring 6-9 mm. Consensus between technologists was achieved in case of discordant recommendations. Detection of advanced neoplasia (classified by a pathologist) was defined as a true-positive (TP) finding. Relative TP and false-positive (FP) fractions were calculated along with 95% confidence intervals (CIs). Results: Overall, 96 of the 982 participants were referred for colonoscopy and 104 were scheduled for surveillance. Sixty of 84 participants (71%) referred for colonoscopy by the radiologist had advanced neoplasia, compared with 55 of 64 participants (86%) referred by two technologists. Both the radiologist and technologists detected all colorectal cancers (n = 5). The relative TP fraction (for technologists vs radiologist) for advanced neoplasia was 0.92 (95% CI: 0.78, 1.07), and the relative FP fraction was 0.38 (95% CI: 0.21, 0.67). Conclusion: Two technologists serving as a primary reader of CT colonographic images can achieve a comparable sensitivity to that of a radiologist for the detection of advanced neoplasia, with far fewer FP referrals for colonoscopy.
机译:目的:比较在基于人群的计算机断层扫描(CT)结肠造影筛查程序中检测晚期肿瘤的放射科医生和经过培训的技术人员的诊断率。资料和方法:获得荷兰卫生委员会的道德批准,并获得所有参与者的书面知情同意。在2009年7月13日至2011年1月21日进行非导盲肠准备(碘标记)后,有982名参与者(507名男性,475名女性)接受了低剂量CT结肠造影。每次扫描均由三位经​​验丰富的放射科医生中的一位进行评估( ≥800次检查),先进行二维(2D)初次阅读,然后进行二次计算机辅助检测(CAD),再由四名经过培训的技术人员中的两个进行检查(≥200次检查,并通过结肠镜检查),先进行2D初次阅读,然后进行三维分析和CAD。建议对病变至少为10 mm的参与者进行立即结肠镜检查,并建议对病变为6-9 mm的参与者进行监测。在不一致的建议下,技术人员之间达成了共识。晚期肿瘤形成的检测(由病理学家分类)被定义为真阳性(TP)发现。相对TP和假阳性(FP)分数与95%置信区间(CI)一起计算。结果:总共982名参与者中有96名接受了结肠镜检查,有104名计划进行监测。放射科医生转诊为结肠镜检查的84位参与者中有60位(71%)患有晚期肿瘤,而两名技术人员转介了64位参与者中的55位(86%)。放射科医生和技术人员都检测到所有大肠癌(n = 5)。晚期赘生物的相对TP分数(技术人员和放射线医师)为0.92(95%CI:0.78,1.07),相对FP分数为0.38(95%CI:0.21,0.67)。结论:两位技术专家是CT结肠镜图像的主要阅读者,其与晚期肿瘤形成的放射学检查者相比,放射线筛查的敏感性要与放射科医生相当,而FP引荐的结肠镜检查要少得多。

著录项

相似文献

  • 外文文献
  • 中文文献
  • 专利
获取原文

客服邮箱:kefu@zhangqiaokeyan.com

京公网安备:11010802029741号 ICP备案号:京ICP备15016152号-6 六维联合信息科技 (北京) 有限公司©版权所有
  • 客服微信

  • 服务号