COMPARATIVE STUDY
JOURNAL ARTICLE
Add like
Add dislike
Add to saved papers

Comparison of mammographic density estimation by Volpara software with radiologists' visual assessment: analysis of clinical-radiologic factors affecting discrepancy between them.

Acta Radiologica 2015 September
BACKGROUND: Volumetric breast density analysis is useful for quantitative mammographic assessment. However, there are few studies about clinical-radiologic factors contributing to discrepancies in the visual assessment by radiologists.

PURPOSE: To compare automated volumetric breast density measurement with BI-RADS breast density category by radiologists' visual assessments and to evaluate the clinical-radiologic factors affecting disagreement between two estimations.

MATERIAL AND METHODS: From February 2011 to September 2012, 860 patients (mean age, 54.7 ± 10.2 years) who had undergone digital mammography including fully automated volumetric breast density analysis, were enrolled. The agreement in breast density assessments between two radiologists, and between an experienced radiologist and the automated software were evaluated using a weighted kappa (k) value. Clinical-radiologic factors contributing to disagreement between the results obtained by a radiologist and the automated software were evaluated using univariate and multivariate analysis.

RESULTS: Breast density assessments obtained by two different radiologists were in good agreement (weighted k statistics 0.835%; 95% confidence interval [CI], 0.8098-0.8608); breast density assessments obtained by an experienced radiologist versus automated software were in moderate agreement (weighted k statistics 0.799%; 95% CI, 0.7708-0.8263). Univariate analysis identified a difference in bilateral breast density and patient age as two factors that significantly contributed to disagreement between the two approaches (P = 0.0002, P = 0.019). Multivariate analysis only identified a difference in bilateral breast density as a contributing factor.

CONCLUSION: The automated volumetric breast density measurement showed good agreement with radiologists' assessment. The difference in bilateral breast density affected the disagreement between results from visual assessment and automated software.

Full text links

We have located links that may give you full text access.
Can't access the paper?
Try logging in through your university/institutional subscription. For a smoother one-click institutional access experience, please use our mobile app.

Related Resources

For the best experience, use the Read mobile app

Mobile app image

Get seemless 1-tap access through your institution/university

For the best experience, use the Read mobile app

All material on this website is protected by copyright, Copyright © 1994-2024 by WebMD LLC.
This website also contains material copyrighted by 3rd parties.

By using this service, you agree to our terms of use and privacy policy.

Your Privacy Choices Toggle icon

You can now claim free CME credits for this literature searchClaim now

Get seemless 1-tap access through your institution/university

For the best experience, use the Read mobile app