Skip to main content

Advertisement

Log in

An Online Evidence-Based Decision Support System for Distinguishing Benign from Malignant Vertebral Compression Fractures by Magnetic Resonance Imaging Feature Analysis

  • Published:
Journal of Digital Imaging Aims and scope Submit manuscript

An Erratum to this article was published on 19 January 2011

Abstract

Decision support systems have been used to promote the practice of evidence-based medicine. Computer-assisted diagnosis can serve as one element of evidence-based radiology. One area where such tools may provide benefit is analysis of vertebral compression fractures (VCFs), which can be a challenge in MRI interpretation. VCFs may be benign or malignant in etiology, and several MRI features may help to make this important distinction. We describe a web-based decision support system for discriminating benign from malignant VCFs as a prototype for a more general diagnostic decision support framework for radiologists. The system has three components: a feature checklist with an image gallery derived from proven reference cases, a prediction model, and a reporting mechanism. The website allows users to input the findings for a case to be interpreted using a structured feature checklist. The image gallery complements the checklist, for clarity and training purposes. The input from the checklist is then used to calculate the likelihood of malignancy by a logistic regression prediction model. Standardized report text is generated that summarizes pertinent positive and negative findings. This computer-assisted diagnosis system demonstrates the integration of three areas where diagnostic decision support can aid radiologists: first, in image interpretation, through feature checklists and illustrative image galleries; second, in feature-based prediction modeling; and third, in structured reporting. We present a diagnostic decision support tool that provides radiologists with evidence-based guidance for discriminating benign from malignant VCF. This model may be useful in other difficult-diagnosis situations and requires further clinical testing.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this article

Price excludes VAT (USA)
Tax calculation will be finalised during checkout.

Instant access to the full article PDF.

Fig 1
Fig 2
Fig 3
Fig 4
Fig 5

References

  1. Rosenberg W, Donald A: Evidence based medicine: an approach to clinical problem-solving. BMJ 310:1122–1126, 1995

    PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  2. Evidence-Based Medicine Working Group: Evidence-based medicine: a new approach to teaching the practice of medicine. JAMA 268:2420–2425, 1992

    Article  Google Scholar 

  3. Elstein AS: On the origins and development of evidence-based medicine and medical decision making. Inflamm Res 53:S184–S189, 2004

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  4. Hunt DL, Haynes RB, Hayward RSA, Pim MA, Horsman J: Patient-specific evidence-based care recommendations for diabetes mellitus: development and initial clinic experience with a computerized decision support system. Int J Med Inform 51:127–135, 1998

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  5. Sintchenko V, Coiera E, Gilbert G: Decision support systems for antibiotic prescribing. Curr Opin Infect Dis 21:573–579, 2008

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  6. The Evidence-Based Radiology Working Group: Evidence-based radiology: a new approach to the practice of radiology. Radiology 220:566–575, 2001

    Article  Google Scholar 

  7. Medina LS, Blackmore CC: Evidence-based radiology: review and dissemination. Radiology 244:331–336, 2007

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  8. Greenes RA: Computer-aided diagnostic strategy selection. Radiol Clin North Am 24:105–120, 1986

    PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  9. Haddawy P, Jacobson J, Kahn CE: BANTER: A Bayesian network tutoring shell. Artif Intell Med 10:177–200, 1997

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  10. Khorasani R: Role of information technology in improving the quality of care in radiology: an overview. J Am Coll Radiol 2:1035–1036, 2005

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  11. Reed MH: Clinical decision rules in radiology. Acad Radiol 13:562–565, 2006

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  12. Mendelson RM, Bairstow PJ: Imaging pathways: will they be well trodden or less traveled? J Am Coll Radiol 6:160–166, 2009

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  13. Seltzer SE, Getty DJ, Pickett RM, Swets JA, Sica G, Brown J, Saini S, Mattrey R, Harmon B, Francis IR, Chezmar J, Schnall MO, Siegelman ES, Ballerini R, Bhat S: Multimodality diagnosis of liver tumors: feature analysis with CT, liver-specific and contrast-enhanced MR, and a computer model. Acad Radiol 9:256–269, 2002

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  14. Burnside ES: Bayesian networks: computer-assisted diagnosis support in radiology. Acad Radiol 12:422–430, 2005

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  15. Carrino JA, Ohno-Machado L: Development of radiology prediction models using feature analysis. Acad Radiol 12:415–421, 2005

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  16. Wood BP: What’s the evidence? Radiology 213:635–637, 1999

    PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  17. Erickson BJ, Bartholmai B: Computer-aided detection and diagnosis at the start of the third millennium. J Digit Imaging 15:59–68, 2002

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  18. Porter BA, Shields AF, Olson DO: Magnetic resonance imaging of bone marrow disorders. Radiol Clin North Am 24:269–289, 1986

    PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  19. Sherry HS, Levy RN, Siffert RS: Metastatic disease of bone in orthopedic surgery. Clin Orthop Relat Res 169:44–52, 1982

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  20. Notelovitz M: Osteoporosis: prevention, diagnosis, and management, 5th edition. Professional Communications, West Islip, 2008

    Google Scholar 

  21. Riggs BL, Melton III, LJ: The worldwide problem of osteoporosis: insights afforded by epidemiology. Bone 17:505S–511S, 1995

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  22. Langlotz CP: Structured radiology reporting: are we there yet? Radiology 253:23–25, 2009

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  23. Radiological Society of North America. RadLex. Available at http://www.radlex.org. Accessed 8 December 2009

  24. Kahn CE, Langlotz CP, Burnside ES, Carrino JA, Channin DS, Hovsepian DM, Rubin DL: Toward best practices in radiology reporting. Radiology 252:852–856, 2009

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  25. Bates DW, Kuperman GJ, Wang S, Gandhi T, Kittler A, Volk L, Spurr C, Khorasani R, Tanasijevic M, Middleton B: Ten commandments for effective clinical decision support: making the practice of evidence-based medicine a reality. J Am Med Inform Assoc 10:523–530, 2003

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  26. Cuenod CA, Laredo J-D, Chevret S, Hamze B, Naouri J-F, Chapaux X, Bondeville J-M, Tubiana J-M: Acute vertebral collapse due to osteoporosis or malignancy: appearance on unenhanced and gadolinium-enhanced MR images. Radiology 199:541–549, 1996

    PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  27. Uetani M, Hashmi R, Hayashi K: Malignant and benign compression fractures: differentiation and diagnostic pitfalls on MRI. Clin Radiol 59:124–131, 2004

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  28. Sim I, Gorman P, Greenes RA, Haynes RB, Kaplan B, Lehmann H, Tang PC: Clinical decision support systems for the practice of evidence-based medicine. J Am Med Inform Assoc 8:527–534, 2001

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  29. Swett HA, Fisher PR, Cohn AI, Miller PL, Mutalik PG: Expert system-controlled image display. Radiology 172:487–493, 1989

    PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  30. Khorasani R: Clinical decision support in radiology: what is it, why do we need it, and what key features make it effective? J Am Coll Radiol 3:142–143, 2006

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  31. Shortliffe EH: Computer programs to support clinical decision making. JAMA 258:61–66, 1987

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  32. Lurie JD, Tosteson AN, Tosteson TD, et al: Reliability of readings of magnetic resonance imaging features of lumbar spinal stenosis. Spine 33:1605–1610, 2008

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  33. Carrino JA, Lurie JD, Tosteson AN, et al: Lumbar spine: reliability of MR imaging findings. Radiology 250:161–170, 2009

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  34. Wang KC, Filice RW, Eng J: DexNote: a learner-centric tool for radiology knowledge tracking. Am J Roentgenol 193:W118–W121, 2009

    Article  Google Scholar 

Download references

Acknowledgements

The authors thank Dr. Ramin Khorasani, Dr. Francis Cook, Dr. Lucila Ohno-Machado, and Dr. Patrick Jeanmenne for their assistance. JAC acknowledges prior General Electric Radiology Research Academic Fellowship (GERRAF) support. KCW acknowledges the support of RSNA Research and Education Foundation Fellowship Training Grant #FT0904, as well as the support of the Walter and Mary Ciceric Research Award.

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

Authors

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Kenneth C. Wang.

Additional information

An erratum to this article can be found at http://dx.doi.org/10.1007/s10278-011-9359-0

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Cite this article

Wang, K.C., Jeanmenne, A., Weber, G.M. et al. An Online Evidence-Based Decision Support System for Distinguishing Benign from Malignant Vertebral Compression Fractures by Magnetic Resonance Imaging Feature Analysis. J Digit Imaging 24, 507–515 (2011). https://doi.org/10.1007/s10278-010-9316-3

Download citation

  • Published:

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s10278-010-9316-3

Key words

Navigation