Comparative Performance of Two Polyp Detection Systems on CT Colonography
NJ. G. Fletcher, Fargol Booya, Ronald M. Summers, David Roy, Lutz Guendel, Bernhard Schmidt, Cynthia H. McCollough, Jeff L Fidler
OBJECTIVE. The purpose of our study was to evaluate two current automatic polyp detection systems to determine their sensitivity and false-positive rate in patients who have undergone CT colonography and subsequent endoscopy.
MATERIALS AND METHODS. We evaluated two polyp detection systems-Polyp Enhanced Viewing (PEV) and the Summers computer-aided detection (CAD) system (National Institutes of Health [NIH]) using a unique cohort of CT colonography examinations: 31 examinations with true-positive lesions identified by radiologists and 34 examinations with false-positive lesions incorrectly identified by radiologists. All patients had reference-standard colonoscopy within 7 days of CT. Candidate lesions were compared with the endoscopic reference standard and prospective radiologist interpretation. The sensitivity and false-positive rates were calculated for each system.
RESULTS. The NIH system had a higher sensitivity than the PEV tool for polyps > 1 cm (22/23, 96%; 78-99%, 95% CI vs 14/23, 61%; 38-81%, 95% CI; p = 0.008, respectively). There was no significant difference in the detection of medium-sized polyps 6-9 mm in size (8/13 vs 6/13, p = 0.68, respectively). The PEV tool had an average of 1.18 false-positive detections per patient, whereas the NIH tool had an average of 5.20 false-positive detections per patient, with the PEV tool having significantly fewer false-positive detections in both patient groups (p
CONCLUSION. One polyp detection system tended to operate with a higher sensitivity, whereas the other tended to operate with a lower false-positive rate. Prospective trials using polyp detection systems as a primary or secondary means of CT colonography interpretation appear warranted.