Matching Breast Masses Depicted on Different Views. A Comparison of Three Methods

Academic Radiology

Volumn 16, Issue 11, 2009, Pages 1338-1347

  Zheng, Bin ^a   Tan, Jun ^a   Ganott, Marie A ^a   Chough, Denise M ^a   Gur, David ^a  

^a UNIVERSITY OF PITTSBURGH SCHOOL OF MEDICINE   (United States)

Author keywords

Computer aided detection (CAD); image matching; mass detection; technology assessment

Indexed keywords

ARTICLE; ARTIFICIAL NEURAL NETWORK; BREAST TUMOR; COMPUTER ASSISTED RADIOGRAPHY; CONTROLLED STUDY; DATA BASE; FEMALE; HUMAN; INTERMETHOD COMPARISON; MAMMOGRAPHY; NIPPLE; PRIORITY JOURNAL; THORAX WALL; TUMOR DIAGNOSIS; TUMOR VOLUME;

ALGORITHMS; BREAST NEOPLASMS; FEMALE; HUMANS; IMAGING, THREE-DIMENSIONAL; MAMMOGRAPHY; PATTERN RECOGNITION, AUTOMATED; RADIOGRAPHIC IMAGE ENHANCEMENT; RADIOGRAPHIC IMAGE INTERPRETATION, COMPUTER-ASSISTED; REPRODUCIBILITY OF RESULTS; SENSITIVITY AND SPECIFICITY; SUBTRACTION TECHNIQUE;

EID: 70349758116     PISSN: 10766332     EISSN: None     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1016/j.acra.2009.05.005     Document Type: Article

References (17)

1. Gur D., Stalder J.S., Hardesty L.A., et al. Computer-aided detection performance in mammographic examination of masses: assessment. Radiology 233 (2004) 418-423
2. Khoo L.A., Taylor P., and Given-Wilson R.M. Computer-aided detection in the United Kingdom national breast screening program: prospective study. Radiology 237 (2005) 444-449
3. Ko J.M., Nicholas M.J., Mendel J.B., and Slanetz P.J. Prospective assessment of computer-aided detection in interpretation of screening mammograms. AJR Am J Roentgenol 187 (2006) 1483-1491
4. Nishikawa R.M., Edwards A.V., Schmidt R.A., and Papaioannou J. Can radiologists recognize that a computer has identified cancers that they have overlooked?. Proc SPIE 6146 (2006) 1-8
5. Nishikawa R.M., and Kallergi M. Computer-aided detection in its present form is not an effective aid for screening mammography. Med Phys 33 (2006) 811-814
6. Fenton J.J., Taplin S.H., Carney P.A., et al. Influence of computer-aided detection on performance of screening mammography. N Engl J Med 356 (2007) 1399-1409
7. Good W.F., Zheng B., Chang Y.H., et al. Multi-image CAD employing features derived from ipsilateral mammographic views. Proc SPIE 3661 (1999) 474-485
8. Sallam M.Y., and Bowyer K.W. Registration and difference analysis of corresponding mammogram images. Med Imaging Anal 3 (1999) 103-118
9. Kita Y., Highnam R.P., and Brady J.M. Correspondence between different view breast x rays using curved epipolar lines. Comput Vis Image Underst 83 (2001) 38-56
10. Paquerault S., Petrick N., Chan H.P., Sahiner B., and Helvie M.A. Improvement of computerized mass detection on mammograms: fusion of two-view information. Med Phys 29 (2002) 238-247
11. Zheng B., Leader J.K., Abrams G.S., et al. Multiview based computer-aided detection scheme for breast masses. Med Phys 33 (2006) 3135-3143
12. van Engeland S., Timp S., and Karssemeijer N. Finding corresponding regions of interest in mediolateral oblique and craniocaudal mammographic views. Med Phys 33 (2006) 3203-3212
13. van Engeland S., and Karssemeijer N. Combining two mammographic projections in a computer aided mass detection method. Med Phys 34 (2007) 898-905
14. Pu J., Zheng B., Leader J.K., and Gur D. An ellipse-fitting based method for efficient registration of breast masses on two mammographic views. Med Phys 35 (2008) 487-494
15. Zheng B., Leader J.K., Abrams G., et al. Computer-aided detection schemes: the effect of limiting the number of cued regions in each case. AJR Am J Roentgenol 182 (2004) 579-583
16. Zheng B., Lu A., Hardesty L.A., et al. A method to improve visual similarity of breast masses for an interactive computer-aided diagnosis environment. Med Phys 33 (2006) 111-117
17. Sahiner B., Chan H.P., Hadjiiski L.M., et al. Joint two-view information for computerized detection of microcalcifications on mammograms. Med Phys 33 (2006) 2574-2585