HOME HELP FEEDBACK SUBSCRIPTIONS ARCHIVE SEARCH TABLE OF CONTENTS		QUICK SEARCH:   [advanced] Author: Keyword(s): Year:  Vol:  Page:

This Article Figures Only Full Text Full Text (PDF) Submit a response Alert me when this article is cited Alert me when eLetters are posted Alert me if a correction is posted Citation Map Services Email this article to a friend Similar articles in this journal Similar articles in PubMed Alert me to new issues of the journal Download to citation manager Citing Articles Citing Articles via HighWire Citing Articles via Google Scholar Google Scholar Articles by Iinuma, G. Articles by Satake, M. Search for Related Content PubMed PubMed Citation Articles by Iinuma, G. Articles by Satake, M.

Diagnosis of Gastric Cancers: Comparison of Conventional Radiography and Digital Radiography with a 4 Million-Pixel Charge-coupled Device¹

¹ From the Department of Diagnostic Radiology, National Cancer Center Hospital, 1-1 Tsukiji 5-chome, Chuo-ku, Tokyo 104-0045, Japan (G.I., K.U., T.I.) and the Department of Diagnostic Radiology, National Cancer Center Hospital East, Chiba, Japan (S.N., R.S., M.S.). From the 1997 RSNA scientific assembly. Received November 30, 1997; revision requested February 23, 1998; final revision received May 13, 1999; accepted July 20. Address reprint requests to G.I. (e-mail: giinuma@gan2 .ncc.go.jp).

PURPOSE: To evaluate the differences in accuracy and observer performance at conventional radiography and at digital radiography with a 4 million–pixel charge-coupled device (CCD) for the diagnosis of gastric cancers.

MATERIALS AND METHODS: A prospective study was performed of 225 patients with suspected gastric cancer who were referred to our hospital from January 1997 through February 1997. One hundred twelve patients were examined at conventional radiography and 113 were examined at digital radiography, and 24 and 27 patients had gastric cancer, respectively. Six radiologists interpreted the images, with attention to tumor findings. They were blinded to the clinical details, and their interpretations were rated against those of three other radiologists who examined the patients and who were aware of the clinical information such as endoscopic features and/or histopathologic findings in biopsy specimens. Receiver operating characteristic (ROC) analysis was used to compare the differences in observer performance for the diagnosis of gastric cancers at conventional radiography and at digital radiography.

RESULTS: The overall sensitivity was 64.6% at conventional radiography versus 75.3% at digital radiography (P = .287); specificities were 84.5% and 90.5%, respectively (P = .011); and the positive predictive values were 53.1% and 71.3%, respectively (P = .036). ROC analysis clearly showed higher diagnostic performance at digital radiography than at conventional radiography.

CONCLUSION: The data demonstrate the high diagnostic value of digital radiography with a 4 million–pixel CCD for gastric cancers. The technique has considerable potential as an alternative to conventional gastrointestinal radiography.

Index terms: Diagnostic radiology, observer performance • Gastrointestinal tract, neoplasms, 72.11, 72.121, 72.321 • Gastrointestinal tract, radiography, 72.11, 72.121, 72.321 • Radiography, comparative studies, 72.11, 72.121 • Radiography, digital, 72.121 • Receiver operating characteristic (ROC) curve • Stomach, neoplasms, 72.321

This article has been cited by other articles:

				N. A. Obuchowski Receiver Operating Characteristic Curves and Their Use in Radiology Radiology, October 1, 2003; 229(1): 3 - 8. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]