Search

Objectives: The coronal plane is the unique display mode of automated breast (AB) ultrasound (US), which has valuable features of showing the entire breast anatomy and providing additional diagnostic value for breast lesions. However, whether adding the coronal plane could improve the diagnostic performance in screening breast cancer remains uncertain. This study aimed to evaluate the value of adding the coronal plane in interpretation for AB US screening., Methods: In this retrospective study, AB US images from 644 women (396 in the no-finding group, 143 with benign lesions, and 105 with malignant lesions) aged 40-70 years were collected between January 2016 and October 2020. Four novice radiologists (with 1-5 years of experience with breast US) and four experienced radiologists (with >5 years of experience with breast US) were assigned to read all AB US images in the transverse plane plus coronal plane (T + C planes) and transverse plane (T plane) alone in separate reading sessions. Diagnostic performance, lesion conspicuity, and reading time were compared using analysis of variance., Results: The mean reading time of all radiologists was significantly shorter in the T + C planes reading mode than in the T plane alone (115 ± 32 vs 128 ± 31 s, respectively; P < .05), and cancers had a higher conspicuity (odds ratio, 1.76; 95% confidence interval [CI], 1.00-3.08; P = .04). No significant differences were noted in the two reading modes (T + C planes vs T plane) in the sensitivity (82% [95% CI, 74-89%] vs 81% [95% CI, 74-88%], respectively; P = .68) and specificity (68% [95% CI, 62-75%] vs 70% [95% CI, 64-75%], respectively; P = .39) when Breast Imaging-Reporting and Data System (BI-RADS) 3 was set as the threshold. There were also no significant differences in the two reading modes (T + C planes vs T plane) in the sensitivity (70% [95% CI, 64-76%] vs 69% [95% CI, 63-75%], respectively; P = .39) and specificity (91% [95% CI, 87-96%] vs 91% [95% CI, 88-95%], respectively; P = .90) when BI-RADS 4 was set as the threshold. In addition, the mean areas under the receiver operating characteristic curves of all radiologists in the two reading modes (T + C planes vs T plane) were not significantly different (0.84 [95% CI, 0.79-0.89] vs 0.83 [95% CI, 0.78-0.89], respectively; P = .61)., Conclusions: Adding a coronal plane in the AB US screening setting saved the reading time and improved the conspicuity of breast cancers but not the diagnostic performance., (© 2024 American Institute of Ultrasound in Medicine.)

BackgroundComputer-aided detection (CAD) systems may be used to help radiologists interpret automated breast (AB) US images. However, the optimal use of CAD with AB US has, to the knowledge of the authors, not been determined.PurposeTo compare the performance and reading time of different readers by using AB US CAD system to detect breast cancer in different reading modes.Materials and MethodsIn this retrospective study, 1485 AB US images (282 with malignant lesions, 695 with benign lesions, and 508 healthy) in 1452 women (mean age, 43.7 years; age range, 19-82 years) including 529 (36.4%) women who were asymptomatic were collected between 2016 and 2017. A CAD system was used to interpret the images. Three novice readers with 1-3 years of US experience and three experienced readers with 5-10 years of US experience were assigned to read AB US images without CAD, at a second reading (after the reader completed a full unaided interpretation), and at concurrent reading (use of CAD at the start of the assessment). Diagnostic performances and reading times were compared by using analysis of variance.ResultsFor all readers, the mean area under the receiver operating characteristic curve improved from 0.88 (95% confidence interval [CI]: 0.85, 0.91) at without-CAD mode to 0.91 (95% CI: 0.89, 0.92; P < .001) at the second-reading mode and 0.90 (95% CI: 0.89, 0.92; P = .002) at the concurrent-reading mode. The mean sensitivity of novice readers in women who were asymptomatic improved from 67% (95% CI: 63%, 74%) at without-CAD mode to 88% (95% CI: 84%, 89%) at both the second-reading mode and the concurrent-reading mode ( P = .003). Compared with the without-CAD and second-reading modes, the mean reading time per volume of concurrent reading was 16 seconds (95% CI: 11, 22; P < .001) and 27 seconds (95% CI: 21, 32; P < .001) shorter, respectively.ConclusionComputer-aided detection (CAD) was helpful for novice readers to improve cancer detection at automated breast US in women who were asymptomatic. CAD was more efficient when used concurrently for all readers.© RSNA, 2019 Online supplemental material is available for this article. See also the editorial by Slanetz in this issue.