Comparative effectiveness of standard vs. AI-assisted PET/CT reading workflow for pre-treatment lymphoma staging: a multi-institutional reader study evaluation.

PET/CT artificial intelligence efficiency lymphoma multi-reader study

Journal

Frontiers in nuclear medicine (Lausanne, Switzerland)
ISSN: 2673-8880
Titre abrégé: Front Nucl Med
Pays: Switzerland
ID NLM: 9918470388806676

Informations de publication

Date de publication:
2023
Historique:
received: 24 10 2023
accepted: 27 12 2023
medline: 2 10 2024
pubmed: 2 10 2024
entrez: 2 10 2024
Statut: epublish

Résumé

Fluorine-18 fluorodeoxyglucose (FDG)-positron emission tomography/computed tomography (PET/CT) is widely used for staging high-grade lymphoma, with the time to evaluate such studies varying depending on the complexity of the case. Integrating artificial intelligence (AI) within the reporting workflow has the potential to improve quality and efficiency. The aims of the present study were to evaluate the influence of an integrated research prototype segmentation tool implemented within diagnostic PET/CT reading software on the speed and quality of reporting with variable levels of experience, and to assess the effect of the AI-assisted workflow on reader confidence and whether this tool influenced reporting behaviour. Nine blinded reporters (three trainees, three junior consultants and three senior consultants) from three UK centres participated in a two-part reader study. A total of 15 lymphoma staging PET/CT scans were evaluated twice: first, using a standard PET/CT reporting workflow; then, after a 6-week gap, with AI assistance incorporating pre-segmentation of disease sites within the reading software. An even split of PET/CT segmentations with gold standard (GS), false-positive (FP) over-contour or false-negative (FN) under-contour were provided. The read duration was calculated using file logs, while the report quality was independently assessed by two radiologists with >15 years of experience. Confidence in AI assistance and identification of disease was assessed via online questionnaires for each case. There was a significant decrease in time between non-AI and AI-assisted reads (median 15.0 vs. 13.3 min, The study findings indicate that an AI-assisted workflow achieves comparable performance to humans, demonstrating a marginal enhancement in reporting speed. Less experienced readers were more influenced by segmentation errors. An AI-assisted PET/CT reading workflow has the potential to increase reporting efficiency without adversely affecting quality, which could reduce costs and report turnaround times. These preliminary findings need to be confirmed in larger studies.

Sections du résumé

Background UNASSIGNED
Fluorine-18 fluorodeoxyglucose (FDG)-positron emission tomography/computed tomography (PET/CT) is widely used for staging high-grade lymphoma, with the time to evaluate such studies varying depending on the complexity of the case. Integrating artificial intelligence (AI) within the reporting workflow has the potential to improve quality and efficiency. The aims of the present study were to evaluate the influence of an integrated research prototype segmentation tool implemented within diagnostic PET/CT reading software on the speed and quality of reporting with variable levels of experience, and to assess the effect of the AI-assisted workflow on reader confidence and whether this tool influenced reporting behaviour.
Methods UNASSIGNED
Nine blinded reporters (three trainees, three junior consultants and three senior consultants) from three UK centres participated in a two-part reader study. A total of 15 lymphoma staging PET/CT scans were evaluated twice: first, using a standard PET/CT reporting workflow; then, after a 6-week gap, with AI assistance incorporating pre-segmentation of disease sites within the reading software. An even split of PET/CT segmentations with gold standard (GS), false-positive (FP) over-contour or false-negative (FN) under-contour were provided. The read duration was calculated using file logs, while the report quality was independently assessed by two radiologists with >15 years of experience. Confidence in AI assistance and identification of disease was assessed via online questionnaires for each case.
Results UNASSIGNED
There was a significant decrease in time between non-AI and AI-assisted reads (median 15.0 vs. 13.3 min,
Conclusions UNASSIGNED
The study findings indicate that an AI-assisted workflow achieves comparable performance to humans, demonstrating a marginal enhancement in reporting speed. Less experienced readers were more influenced by segmentation errors. An AI-assisted PET/CT reading workflow has the potential to increase reporting efficiency without adversely affecting quality, which could reduce costs and report turnaround times. These preliminary findings need to be confirmed in larger studies.

Identifiants

pubmed: 39355039
doi: 10.3389/fnume.2023.1327186
pmc: PMC11440880
doi:

Types de publication

Journal Article

Langues

eng

Pagination

1327186

Informations de copyright

© 2024 Frood, Willaime, Miles, Chambers, Al-Chalabi, Ali, Hougham, Brooks, Petrides, Naylor, Ward, Sulkin, Chaytor, Strouhal, Patel and Scarsbrook.

Déclaration de conflit d'intérêts

JW is the Vice President of Science and Research and an employee of Mirada Medical Ltd. PS is the Medical Director, BM is the Head of Clinical Systems and NB is the PACS Specialist and are all employees of Alliance Medical Ltd. The remaining authors declare that the research was conducted in the absence of any commercial or financial relationships that could be construed as a potential conflict of interest. The reviewer ST declared a shared affiliation with the authors RF, GC, CP and AS to the handling editor at the time of the review.

Auteurs

Russell Frood (R)

Department of Radiology, Leeds Teaching Hospitals NHS Trust, Leeds, United Kingdom.
Leeds Institute of Health Research, University of Leeds, Leeds, United Kingdom.

Julien M Y Willaime (JMY)

Mirada Medical Ltd., Oxford, United Kingdom.

Brad Miles (B)

Alliance Medical Ltd., Warwick, United Kingdom.

Greg Chambers (G)

Department of Radiology, Leeds Teaching Hospitals NHS Trust, Leeds, United Kingdom.

H'ssein Al-Chalabi (H)

Department of Radiology, Leeds Teaching Hospitals NHS Trust, Leeds, United Kingdom.
Department of Radiology, York and Scarborough Teaching Hospitals NHS Foundation Trust, York, United Kingdom.

Tamir Ali (T)

Department of Radiology, Newcastle upon Tyne Hospitals NHS Foundation Trust, Newcastle, United Kingdom.

Natasha Hougham (N)

Department of Radiology, Royal Cornwall Hospitals NHS Trust, Truro, United Kingdom.

Naomi Brooks (N)

Alliance Medical Ltd., Warwick, United Kingdom.

George Petrides (G)

Department of Radiology, Newcastle upon Tyne Hospitals NHS Foundation Trust, Newcastle, United Kingdom.

Matthew Naylor (M)

Department of Radiology, Newcastle upon Tyne Hospitals NHS Foundation Trust, Newcastle, United Kingdom.

Daniel Ward (D)

Department of Radiology, Newcastle upon Tyne Hospitals NHS Foundation Trust, Newcastle, United Kingdom.

Tom Sulkin (T)

Department of Radiology, Royal Cornwall Hospitals NHS Trust, Truro, United Kingdom.

Richard Chaytor (R)

Department of Radiology, Royal Cornwall Hospitals NHS Trust, Truro, United Kingdom.

Peter Strouhal (P)

Alliance Medical Ltd., Warwick, United Kingdom.

Chirag Patel (C)

Department of Radiology, Leeds Teaching Hospitals NHS Trust, Leeds, United Kingdom.

Andrew F Scarsbrook (AF)

Department of Radiology, Leeds Teaching Hospitals NHS Trust, Leeds, United Kingdom.
Leeds Institute of Health Research, University of Leeds, Leeds, United Kingdom.

Classifications MeSH