Seminars in Roentgenology
Volume 42, Issue 4 , Pages 280-286 , October 2007

Computer-Assisted Detection in Clinical Practice: Medical Legal Considerations

  • R. James Brenner, MD, JD, FACR, FCLM

      Affiliations

    • Corresponding Author InformationAddress reprint requests to R. James Brenner, MD, JD, FACR, FCLM, Professor of Clinical Radiology, Chief of Breast Imaging Section, University of California, San Francisco, University of California, UCSF-Mt. Zion Hospital, Radiology 2804, 1600 Divisadero St., San Francisco, CA 94115-1667.

References 

  1. Gray v Fairview General Hospital, 8th Dist. No 82318,2004-Ohio-1244, app LEXIS 1099 (civil appeal from Cuyahoga County Common Pleas Court, case no. CV443871, decided on December 5, 2003)
  2. Daubert v Merrill Dow Pharmaceuticals, Inc., 509 US 579, 113 SCt 2786 1993
  3. Legal Information Institute Web site. Federal rules of evidence. evidence rule 702©. Available at http://straylight.law.cornell.edu/rules/fre/overview.html. Access August 23, 2005
  4. Brenner RJ. Medical legal aspects of mammography: variable standards of care relating to differing types of practice. AJR Am J Roentgenol. 1991;156:719–723
  5. Skettington v Bradley, 366 Mich 552, 115 NW2d 393 1962
  6. Brenner RJ. Malpractice primer coaches mammography practitioners (Report on practice management). Diagn Imaging. 2001;23:67–73
  7. Vyborney CJ, Doe T, O’Shaughnessy KF, et al. Breast cancer: importance of spiculation in computer-aided detection. Radiology. 2000;215:703–707
  8. Evans WP, Warren-Burhenne L, Laurie L, et al. Invasive lobular carcinoma of the breast: mammographic characteristics and computer-aided detection. Radiology. 2002;225:182–189
  9. Warren-Burhenne L, Wood SD, D’Orsi CJ, et al. Potential contribution of computer-aided detection to the sensitivity of screening mammography. Radiology. 2000;215:554–562
  10. Birdwell RL, Bandodkar P, Ikeda DM. Computer-aided detection with screening mammography in a University Hospital setting. Radiology. 2005;236:451–457
  11. Feig SA. Clinical evaluation of computer-aided detection in breast cancer screening. Semin Breast Dis. 2002;5:232230
  12. Freer TW, Ulissey JM. Screening mammography with computer-aided diction: prospective study of 12,860 patients in a community breast center. Radiology. 2001;220:781–786
  13. Brem RF, Baum J, Lechner M, et al. Improvement in sensitivity of screening mammography with computer-aided detection: a multiinstitutional trial. AJR Am J Roentgenol. 2003;181:687–693
  14. Berg WA, Arnoldus CL, Teferra E, et al. Biopsy of amorphous breast calcifications and yield of stereotactic biopsy. Radiology. 2001;221:495–503
  15. Soo MS, Rosen EL, Xia JQ, et al. Computer-aided detection of amorphous calcifications. AJR Am J Roentgenol. 2005;184:887–892
  16. Baker JA, Rosen EL, Lo JY, et al. Computer-aided detection (CAD) in screening mammography: sensitivity of commercial CAD systems for detecting architectural distortion. AJR Am J Roentgenol. 2003;181:1083–1088
  17. Helvie MA, Hadjiiski L, Makarlou E, et al. Sensitivity of noncommercial computer-aided detection system for mammographic breast cancer detection: pilot clinical trial. Radiology. 2004;231:208–214
  18. Cupples TE, Cuningham JE, Reynold JC. Impact of computer-aided detection in a regional screening mammography program. AJR Am J Roentgenol. 2005;185:944–950
  19. Thurfjell ED, Thurfjell MG, Egge E, et al. Sensitivity and specificity of computer-assisted breast cancer detection in mammography screening. Acta Radiol. 1998;39:384–388
  20. Gur D, Sumkin JH, Rockette HE, et al. Changes in breast cancer detection and mammography recall rates after the introduction of a computer-aided detection system. J Natl Cancer Inst. 2004;96:185–190
  21. Feig SA, Sickles EA, Evans WP, et al. Changes in breast cancer detection and mammography recall rates after the introduction of computer-aided detection system (correspondence). J Natl Cancer Inst. 2004;96:1260–1261
  22. Garvican L, Field S. A pilot evaluation of the R2 Image Checker System and user’s response in the detection of interval breast cancers on previous screening films. Clin Radiol. 2001;56:833–837
  23. Moberg K, Bjurstam N, Wilczek B, et al. Computer-assisted detection of interval breast cancers. Eur J Radiol. 2001;139:104–110
  24. Marx C, Malich A, Facius M, et al. Are unnecessary follow-up procedures induced by computer-aided diagnosis (CAD) in mammography? (Comparison of mammographic diagnosis with and without use of CAD). Eur J Radiol. 2004;51:66–72
  25. Hooper TJ: 60 F. 2d 737 2d Cir. 1932.
  26. Feig S. How does computer-aided detection influence screening outcomes? (Are all radiologists aided equally?). (editorial) Breast Dis Q. 2005;2:116–119
  27. Wickline v State of California 183 Cal App 1064, 118 Cal Rptr 661, 1986
  28. Brenner RJ. False negative mammograms: medical, legal, and risk management implications. Radiol Clin N Am. 2000;38:741–757
  29. Ikeda DM, Birdwell RL, O’Shaughnessy KF, et al. Computer-aided detection output on 172 subtle findings on normal mammograms previously obtained in women with breast cancer detected at follow-up screening mammography. Radiology. 2004;230:811–819
  30. Ikeda DM, Birdwell RL, O’Shaughnessy KF, et al. Analysis of 17 subtle findings on prior normal mammograms in women with breast cancer detected at follow-up screening. Radiology. 2003;226:494–503
  31. Brenner RJ, Ulissey MJ, Wilt RM. Computer-aided detection as evidence in the courtroom: potential implications of an appellate court’s ruling. AJR Am J Roentgenol. 2006;186:48–51
  32. Sickles EA. Management of probably benign breast lesions. Radiol Clinics N Am. 1995;33:1123–1131
  33. Destounis SV, DiNitto P, Logan-Young W, et al. Can computer-aided detection with double reading of screening mammograms help decrease false negative rate: initial experience. Radiology. 2004;232:578–584
  34. Karssemeijer N, Otten JDM, Verbeek ALM, et al. Computer-aided detection versus independent double reading of masses on mammograms. Radiology. 2003;227:192–200
  35. Brenner RJ. Independent double reading of screening mammograms in The Netherlands: Effect of arbitration following reader disagreement. (editorial comment) Breast Dis Yearbook Q. 2005;15:408–409
  36. Huo Z, Giger ML, Olopade OI, et al. Computerized analysis of digitized mammograms of BRCA 1 and BRCA2 gene mutation carriers. Radiology. 2002;225:519–526
  37. Kobayashi T, Xu XW, MacMahon H, et al. Effect of a computer-aided diagnosis scheme on radiologists’ performance in detection of lung nodules on radiographs. Radiology. 1996;199:843–848
  38. Perumpillichira JJ, Yoshida H, Sahani DV. Computer-aided detection for virtual colonoscopy. Cancer Imaging. 2005;5:11–16
  39. Yoshida H, Dachman AH. Computer-aided diagnosis for CT colonography. Semin Ultrasound CT MR. 2004;25:419–431
  40. Awai K, Murao K, Ozawa A. Pulmonary nodules: estimation of malignancy at thin-section helical CT—effect of computer-aided diagnosis on performance of radiologists. Radiology. 2006;239:276–284
  41. Wu Y, Giger ML, Doi K, et al. Artificial neural networks in mammography: application to decision making in the diagnosis of breast cancer. Radiology. 1993;187:81–87
  42. Chen D, Chang R, Huang Y. Computer-aided diagnosis applied to US of solid breast nodules by using neural networks. Radiology. 1999;213:407–412
  43. Hadjiiski L, Sahiner B, Helvie MA, et al. Breast masses: computer-aided diagnosis with serial mammograms. Radiology. 2006;240:343–356
  44. Horsch K, Giger ML, Vyborny CJ, et al. Classification of breast lesions with multimodality computer-aided diagnosis: observer study results on an independent clinical data set. Radiology. 2006;240:357–368
  45. Weaver KL, Drag DN, Manna EA, et al. Comparison of pathologist-detected and automated computer-assisted image analysis detected sentinel lymph node micro metastases in breast cancer. Mod Pathol. 2003;16:1159–1164
  46. Harton JW, Wooding DS. The effect of novel prompts upon radiologists’ visual search of mammograms. Proc SPIE. 2004;5372:211–217
  47. Lindfors KK, McGahan MC, Rosenquist CJ, et al. Computer-aided detection of breast cancer: a cost-effectiveness study. Radiology. 2006;239:710–717

PII: S0037-198X(07)00042-9

doi: 10.1053/j.ro.2007.07.004

Seminars in Roentgenology
Volume 42, Issue 4 , Pages 280-286 , October 2007

Article Tools