论文部分内容阅读
通过使用高、低两种分辨率的乳腺影像图来比较3M与5M医用专业显示器对乳腺微钙化识读的影响。选择高、低两种分辨率的乳腺影像图各100例(各含微钙化病例40例、正常对照病例60例)。由1名高年资和1名低年资放射科医师评估两种显示器对乳腺微钙化的显示率,识别效能用ROC曲线判断,并使用Kappa分析检验两名医生的判读一致性。在低分辨率影像图组中,两名医生在3M与5M医用专业显示器上对微钙化的识别效能相同(P=0.451及0.559);在高分辨率影像图组中,高年资医生使用5M医用专业显示器对乳腺微钙化的识别率明显高于3M(P=0.022),低年资医生的识别率无显著差异(P=0.141)。两名医生在5M显示器上判读的一致性都好于3M显示器,在5M显示器上判读高分辨率影像图时,两名医生的判读有极好的一致性(K=0.862)。因此,对不同分辨率的乳腺影像图,应配套相应分辨率的显示器,高年资医师识读高分辨率影像图组时应配套5M显示器更利于微钙化的检出。
Compare the impact of 3M and 5M medical professional monitors on breast microcalcification by using high and low resolution mammograms. Select the high and low resolution of the breast image of 100 cases (each with 40 cases of micro-calcification, 60 cases of normal control cases). A high-grade and a junior radiologist evaluated the display rate of microcalcification on the two kinds of monitors, the discriminative power of the two kinds of monitors on the ROC curve and the Kappa analysis on the interpretation consistency of the two doctors. In the low-resolution imaging group, the two doctors had the same (n = 3) performance of recognition of microcalcifications on 3M and 5M medical displays (P = 0.451 and 0.559). In the high-resolution imaging group, senior doctors used 5M The recognition rate of the medical professional monitor on the microcalcifications of the breast was significantly higher than that of 3M (P = 0.022), but no significant difference was found between the doctors of the younger professions (P = 0.141). Both doctors consistently read better on 5M monitors than 3M monitors, and the two doctors had excellent interpretations (K = 0.862) when interpreting high-resolution images on a 5M monitor. Therefore, the different resolution of the mammogram should be matched with the corresponding resolution of the display, senior physician reading high-resolution image group should be supporting 5M display is more conducive to the detection of micro-calcification.