J Sebastian, I D Olaru, A Giannakis, M Arentz, S V Kik, M Ruhwald, S Linsen, G Günther, P Wolf, F J Herth, T Weber, C M Denkinger
{"title":"在利用计算机辅助数字解决方案进行肺结核筛查时检测其他病症。","authors":"J Sebastian, I D Olaru, A Giannakis, M Arentz, S V Kik, M Ruhwald, S Linsen, G Günther, P Wolf, F J Herth, T Weber, C M Denkinger","doi":"10.5588/ijtldopen.24.0428","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Background: </strong>Computer-aided detection (CAD) tools for TB detection have the potential to enable screening programmes and reduce the diagnostic gap in settings where access to radiologists is limited. However, there are concerns that other common chest X-ray (CXR) abnormalities not due to TB may be missed.</p><p><strong>Methods: </strong>We assessed the performance of three commercialised CAD tools (qXR, INSIGHT CXR and DrAID<sup>TM</sup> TB XR) to detect common non-TB abnormalities against readings with a standardised annotation guide by an expert radiologist. More than 20 well-characterised diagnoses besides TB significant in TB high-burden countries were examined.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>The 517 CXRs included were deemed abnormal by the three CAD with a sensitivity of respectively 97% (95% CI 95-98), 94% (95% CI 91-95), and 87% (95% CI 84-90) for INSIGHT CXR, qXR, and DrAID. The CAD generally detected abnormalities in patients with critical diagnoses such as lung cancer or heart failure. Performance for detecting other abnormalities was variable.</p><p><strong>Conclusion: </strong>This study showed that the three CAD tools identified CXRs as abnormal when diseases other than TB were present. Our findings alleviate ethical concerns of missing abnormalities other than TB when using commercially available CAD for TB screening and show their potential broader applicability.</p>","PeriodicalId":519984,"journal":{"name":"IJTLD open","volume":"1 12","pages":"533-539"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2024-12-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC11636493/pdf/","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Detection of other pathologies when utilising computer-assisted digital solutions for TB screening.\",\"authors\":\"J Sebastian, I D Olaru, A Giannakis, M Arentz, S V Kik, M Ruhwald, S Linsen, G Günther, P Wolf, F J Herth, T Weber, C M Denkinger\",\"doi\":\"10.5588/ijtldopen.24.0428\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"<p><strong>Background: </strong>Computer-aided detection (CAD) tools for TB detection have the potential to enable screening programmes and reduce the diagnostic gap in settings where access to radiologists is limited. However, there are concerns that other common chest X-ray (CXR) abnormalities not due to TB may be missed.</p><p><strong>Methods: </strong>We assessed the performance of three commercialised CAD tools (qXR, INSIGHT CXR and DrAID<sup>TM</sup> TB XR) to detect common non-TB abnormalities against readings with a standardised annotation guide by an expert radiologist. More than 20 well-characterised diagnoses besides TB significant in TB high-burden countries were examined.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>The 517 CXRs included were deemed abnormal by the three CAD with a sensitivity of respectively 97% (95% CI 95-98), 94% (95% CI 91-95), and 87% (95% CI 84-90) for INSIGHT CXR, qXR, and DrAID. The CAD generally detected abnormalities in patients with critical diagnoses such as lung cancer or heart failure. Performance for detecting other abnormalities was variable.</p><p><strong>Conclusion: </strong>This study showed that the three CAD tools identified CXRs as abnormal when diseases other than TB were present. Our findings alleviate ethical concerns of missing abnormalities other than TB when using commercially available CAD for TB screening and show their potential broader applicability.</p>\",\"PeriodicalId\":519984,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"IJTLD open\",\"volume\":\"1 12\",\"pages\":\"533-539\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":0.0000,\"publicationDate\":\"2024-12-01\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC11636493/pdf/\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"IJTLD open\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"1085\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.5588/ijtldopen.24.0428\",\"RegionNum\":0,\"RegionCategory\":null,\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"\",\"JCRName\":\"\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"IJTLD open","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.5588/ijtldopen.24.0428","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0
摘要
背景:用于肺结核检测的计算机辅助检测(CAD)工具有可能促进筛查计划,并在放射科医生人手有限的情况下缩小诊断差距。然而,人们担心非肺结核引起的其他常见胸部 X 光(CXR)异常可能会被漏诊:我们评估了三种商业化 CAD 工具(qXR、INSIGHT CXR 和 DrAIDTM TB XR)在检测常见非结核病异常方面的性能,并与放射科专家使用标准化注释指南读取的结果进行了对比。除了在结核病高负担国家具有重要意义的结核病外,还对 20 多种特征明确的诊断进行了检查:结果:INSIGHT CXR、qXR 和 DrAID 的灵敏度分别为 97%(95% CI 95-98)、94%(95% CI 91-95)和 87%(95% CI 84-90)。CAD 通常能检测出肺癌或心力衰竭等重要诊断患者的异常。结论:这项研究表明,当存在结核病以外的其他疾病时,三种计算机辅助诊断工具能将 CXR 鉴定为异常。我们的研究结果减轻了使用市售计算机辅助诊断系统进行肺结核筛查时可能会遗漏肺结核以外的其他异常情况的道德担忧,并显示了其潜在的广泛适用性。
Detection of other pathologies when utilising computer-assisted digital solutions for TB screening.
Background: Computer-aided detection (CAD) tools for TB detection have the potential to enable screening programmes and reduce the diagnostic gap in settings where access to radiologists is limited. However, there are concerns that other common chest X-ray (CXR) abnormalities not due to TB may be missed.
Methods: We assessed the performance of three commercialised CAD tools (qXR, INSIGHT CXR and DrAIDTM TB XR) to detect common non-TB abnormalities against readings with a standardised annotation guide by an expert radiologist. More than 20 well-characterised diagnoses besides TB significant in TB high-burden countries were examined.
Results: The 517 CXRs included were deemed abnormal by the three CAD with a sensitivity of respectively 97% (95% CI 95-98), 94% (95% CI 91-95), and 87% (95% CI 84-90) for INSIGHT CXR, qXR, and DrAID. The CAD generally detected abnormalities in patients with critical diagnoses such as lung cancer or heart failure. Performance for detecting other abnormalities was variable.
Conclusion: This study showed that the three CAD tools identified CXRs as abnormal when diseases other than TB were present. Our findings alleviate ethical concerns of missing abnormalities other than TB when using commercially available CAD for TB screening and show their potential broader applicability.