Performance and Reading Time of Automated Breast US with or without Computer-aided Detection

Abstract

se of mammography has been shown in randomized controlled trials (1,2) to reduce breast cancer mortality. However, the sensitivity of mammography is poor in women with dense fibroglandular tissue (3,4). As a supplement to mammography, handheld US and automated breast (AB) US can help to improve detection of cancer (5-8). Handheld US is operator dependent, and therefore the experience of the operator is important. At AB US, full coverage of each breast consists of two to five acquisitions (8,9). Each acquisition contains more than 300 transverse images and reconstructions in coronal and sagittal planes, forming a volume of US images. The high-resolution AB US volume acquires up to 3000 two-dimensional images per woman, and interpretation is longer than that of a conventional US image (8). In addition, the probability of overlooking subtle lesions may be substantial in women who are asymptomatic (9). Thus, a commercially developed computer-aided detection (CAD) system may be used to help radiologists interpret AB US images (10).A CAD system can be used either as a second or concurrent reader (11-13). The classic CAD implementation is second-reading mode at which CAD is applied after the reader has completed a full, unaided assessment (14). However, such implementation increases interpretation time. A potentially more efficient paradigm is concurrentreading mode, in which CAD is applied at the start of the assessment. However, concurrent application of CAD may reduce reader's vigilance, reducing sensitivity (12). It is also contrary to the recommendations for CAD at mammography, at which the CAD display of prompts should be displayed only after the radiologist has completed their initial assessment. In addition, the usefulness of applying CAD to

Automated Breast Ultrasound: Technical Aspects, Impact on Breast Screening, and Future Perspectives

“…A CAD software for 3D ABUS (QVCAD™, QView Medical) has been recently developed and FDA approved [41]. Several studies have been investigating the benefits of concurrent-read CAD systems for interpretation of screening ABUS, and CAD seems to significantly reduce interpretation time, up to 35%, as well as improving diagnostic accuracy [42][43][44]. Another approach to speed up reading is the use of coronal plane only [45], but more work on this is required to ensure that sensitivity does not drop.…”

The Utility of Deep Learning in Breast Ultrasonic Imaging: A Review

“…This diagnostic support system has been approved by the FDA and reported to be useful in the US [47]. Yang et al [48] and Xu et al [49] also demonstrated that CAD systems improve the diagnostic performance for ABUS interpretation (Table 2). CAD, computer-assisted diagnosis; AUC, area under the curve; ABUS, automated breast ultrasound.…”

Characterization of Breast Lesions: Comparison between Three-dimensional Ultrasound and Automated Volume Breast Ultrasound

“…Additionally, the anatomical planes of interest within the volume can be visualized and reviewed in multiplanar views, including the transverse, sagittal, and coronal planes [12][13][14]. In the last few years, an automated whole breast ultrasound equipment, i.e., automated breast volume scanner (ABVS), has been increasingly used in breast imaging practice, including detection and characterization [11,[15][16][17], and assessment of treatment response after neoadjuvant chemotherapy [18]. Compared with conventional 3D-US, the advantage of ABVS lies in a large field of view, so that the breast can be fully displayed by only two to four-volume scans [11,15,19].…”