Evaluation of a method of computer-aided detection (CAD) of pulmonary nodules with computed tomography

The authors sought to compare the sensitivity and reading time obtained using computer-aided detection (CAD) software as second reader (SR) or concurrent reader (CR) in the identification of pulmonary nodules.

Unenhanced CT scans of 100 consecutive cancer patients were retrospectively reviewed by four readers to identify all solid, noncalcified pulmonary nodules ranging from 3 to 30 mm in diameter. The sensitivity and reading time of each reader and of CAD alone were calculated at 3-mm and 5-mm thresholds with respect to the reference standard, consisting of a consensus reading by the four radiologists involved in the study. The McNemar test was used to compare the sensitivities obtained by reading without CAD (readers 1 and 2), with CAD as SR (readers 1 and 2 with a 2-month delay), and with CAD as CR (readers 3 and 4). The paired Student's t test was used to compare reading times. A value of p<0.05 was considered statistically significant.

A total of 258 and 224 nodules were identified at 3-mm and 5-mm thresholds, respectively. The sensitivity of CAD alone was 62.79% and 67.41% at the 3-mm and 5-mm threshold values respectively, with 4.15 and 2.96 false-positive findings per examination. CAD as SR produced a significant increase in sensitivity (p<0.001) in nodule detection with respect to reading without CAD both at 3 mm (12.01%) and 5 mm (10.04%); the average increase in sensitivity obtained when comparing CAD as SR to CAD as CR was statistically significant (p<0.025) both at the 3-mm (5.35%) and 5-mm (4.68%) thresholds. CAD as CR produced a nonsignificant increase in sensitivity compared with reading without CAD (p>0.05). Mean reading time using CAD as SR (330 s) was significantly longer than reading without CAD (135 s, p<0.001) and reading with CAD as CR (195 s, p<0.025).

The use of CAD as CR, without any significant increase in reading time, produces no significant increase in sensitivity in pulmonary nodule detection when compared with reading without CAD (p>0.05); CAD as SR, at the cost of longer reading times, increases sensitivity when compared with reading without CAD (p<0.001) or with CAD as CR (p<0.025).