Network


Latest external collaboration on country level. Dive into details by clicking on the dots.

Hotspot


Dive into the research topics where Abraham H. Dachman is active.

Publication


Featured researches published by Abraham H. Dachman.


The Lancet | 2005

Analysis of air contrast barium enema, computed tomographic colonography, and colonoscopy: prospective comparison.

Don C. Rockey; Erik K. Paulson; Donna Niedzwiecki; W Davis; Hayden B. Bosworth; Linda L. Sanders; Judy Yee; J Henderson; P Hatten; S Burdick; Arun J. Sanyal; David T. Rubin; Mark Sterling; Geetanjali A. Akerkar; Bhutani; Kenneth F. Binmoeller; John J. Garvie; Edmund J. Bini; Kenneth R. McQuaid; Wl Foster; William M. Thompson; Abraham H. Dachman; Robert A. Halvorsen

BACKGROUND The usefulness of currently available colon imaging tests, including air contrast barium enema (ACBE), computed tomographic colonography (CTC), and colonoscopy, to detect colon polyps and cancers is uncertain. We aimed to assess the sensitivity of these three imaging tests. METHODS Patients with faecal occult blood, haematochezia, iron-deficiency anaemia, or a family history of colon cancer underwent three separate colon-imaging studies--ACBE, followed 7-14 days later by CTC and colonoscopy on the same day. The primary outcome was detection of colonic polyps and cancers. Outcomes were assessed by building an aggregate view of the colon, taking into account results of all three tests. FINDINGS 614 patients completed all three imaging tests. When analysed on a per-patient basis, for lesions 10 mm or larger in size (n=63), the sensitivity of ACBE was 48% (95% CI 35-61), CTC 59% (46-71, p=0.1083 for CTC vs ACBE), and colonoscopy 98% (91-100, p<0.0001 for colonoscopy vs CTC). For lesions 6-9 mm in size (n=116), sensitivity was 35% for ACBE (27-45), 51% for CTC (41-60, p=0.0080 for CTC vs ACBE), and 99% for colonoscopy (95-100, p<0.0001 for colonoscopy vs CTC). For lesions of 10 mm or larger in size, the specificity was greater for colonoscopy (0.996) than for either ACBE (0.90) or CTC (0.96) and declined for ACBE and CTC when smaller lesions were considered. INTERPRETATION Colonoscopy was more sensitive than other tests, as currently undertaken, for detection of colonic polyps and cancers. These data have important implications for diagnostic use of colon imaging tests.


Gastroenterology | 2003

Computerized tomographic colonography: Performance evaluation in a retrospective multicenter setting

C. Daniel Johnson; Alicia Y. Toledano; Benjamin A. Herman; Abraham H. Dachman; Elizabeth G. McFarland; Matthew Barish; James A. Brink; Randy D. Ernst; Joel G. Fletcher; Robert A. Halvorsen; Amy K. Hara; Kenneth D. Hopper; Robert E. Koehler; David Lu; Michael Macari; Robert L. MacCarty; Frank H. Miller; Martina M. Morrin; Erik K. Paulson; Judy Yee; Michael E. Zalis

BACKGROUND & AIMS No multicenter study has been reported evaluating the performance and interobserver variability of computerized tomographic colonography. The aim of this study was to assess the accuracy of computerized tomographic colonography for detecting clinically important colorectal neoplasia (polyps >or=10 mm in diameter) in a multi-institutional study. METHODS A retrospective study was developed from 341 patients who had computerized tomographic colonography and colonoscopy among 8 medical centers. Colonoscopy and pathology reports provided the standard. A random sample of 117 patients, stratified by criterion standard, was requested. Ninety-three patients were included (47% with polyps >or=10 mm; mean age, 62 years; 56% men; 84% white; 40% reported colorectal symptoms; 74% at increased risk for colorectal cancer). Eighteen radiologists blinded to the criterion standard interpreted computerized tomography colonography examinations, each using 2 of 3 different software display platforms. RESULTS The average area under the receiver operating characteristic curve for identifying patients with at least 1 lesion >or=10 mm was 0.80 (95% lower confidence bound, 0.74). The average sensitivity and specificity were 75% (95% lower confidence bound, 68%) and 73% (95% lower confidence bound, 66%), respectively. Per-polyp sensitivity was 75%. A trend was observed for better performance with more observer experience. There was no difference in performance across software display platforms. CONCLUSIONS Computerized tomographic colonography performance compared favorably with reported performance of fecal occult blood testing, flexible sigmoidoscopy, and barium enema. A prospective study evaluating the performance of computerized tomography colonography in a screening population is indicated.


Abdominal Imaging | 2004

CAD techniques, challenges, and controversies in computed tomographic colonography.

Hiro Yoshida; Abraham H. Dachman

Computer-aided diagnosis (CAD) for computed tomographic colonography (CTC) automatically detects the locations of suspicious polyps and masses on CTC and provides radiologists with a second opinion. CAD has the potential to increase radiologists’ diagnostic performance in the detection of polyps and masses and to decrease variability of the diagnostic accuracy among readers without significantly increasing the reading time. Technical developments have advanced CAD substantially during the past several years, and a fundamental scheme for the detection of polyps has been established. The most recent CAD systems based on this scheme produce a clinically acceptable high sensitivity and a low false-positive rate. However, CAD for CTC is still under active development, and the technology needs to be improved further. This report describes the expected benefits, the current fundamental scheme, the key techniques used for detection of polyps and masses on CTC, the current detection performance, as well as the pitfalls, challenges, controversies, and the future of CAD.


Journal of The American College of Radiology | 2009

ACR Colon Cancer Committee White Paper: Status of CT Colonography 2009

Elizabeth G. McFarland; Joel G. Fletcher; Perry J. Pickhardt; Abraham H. Dachman; Judy Yee; Cynthia H. McCollough; Michael Macari; Paul Knechtges; Michael E. Zalis; Matthew A. Barish; David H. Kim; Kathryn J. Keysor; C. Daniel Johnson

PURPOSE To review the current status and rationale of the updated ACR practice guidelines for CT colonography (CTC). METHODS Clinical validation trials in both the United States and Europe are reviewed. Key technical aspects of the CTC examination are emphasized, including low-dose protocols, proper insufflation, and bowel preparation. Important issues of implementation are discussed, including training and certification, definition of the target lesion, reporting of colonic and extracolonic findings, quality metrics, reimbursement, and cost-effectiveness. RESULTS Successful validation trials in screening cohorts both in the United States with ACRIN and in Germany demonstrated sensitivity > or = 90% for patients with polyps >10 mm. Proper technique is critical, including low-dose techniques in screening cohorts, with an upper limit of the CT dose index by volume of 12.5 mGy per examination. Training new readers includes the requirement of interactive workstation training with 2-D and 3-D image display techniques. The target lesion is defined as a polyp > or = 6 mm, consistent with the American Cancer Society joint guidelines. Five quality metrics have been defined for CTC, with pilot data entered. Although the CMS national noncoverage decision in May 2009 was a disappointment, multiple third-party payers are reimbursing for screening CTC. Cost-effective modeling has shown CTC to be a dominant strategy, including in a Medicare cohort. CONCLUSION Supported by third-party payer reimbursement for screening, CTC will continue to further transition into community practice and can provide an important adjunctive examination for colorectal screening.


Journal of Computer Assisted Tomography | 2002

Automated knowledge-guided segmentation of colonic walls for computerized detection of polyps in CT colonography

Janne Näppi; Abraham H. Dachman; Peter MacEneaney; Hiroyuki Yoshida

Purpose We have developed a novel automated technique for segmenting colonic walls for the application of computer-aided polyp detection in CT colonography. In particular, the technique was designed to minimize the presence of extracolonic components, such as small bowel, in the segmented colon. Methods The segmentation technique combines an improved version of our previously reported anatomy-oriented colon segmentation technique with a colon-based analysis step that performs self-adjusting volume-growing within the colonic lumen. Extracolonic components are eliminated by intersecting of the resulting two segmentations, so that the colonic walls remain in the intersection. The technique was evaluated on 88 CT colonography datasets. The colon segmentations were evaluated subjectively by four radiologists, as well as objectively by performance of an automated polyp detection on the segmentation. For comparison, the tests were also performed for the anatomy-oriented colon segmentation technique. Results On average, the technique covered 98% of the visible colonic walls. Approximately 50% of the extracolonic components remaining in the anatomy-oriented segmentation were removed, but 10–15% of the segmentation still contained extracolonic components. The dataset-based false-positive rate of the automated polyp detection was improved by 10% without compromising the 100% case-based sensitivity, and the case-based false-positive rate was improved by 15% over the previous false-positive rate. Conclusions The technique segments practically all of the colonic walls in the region of diagnostic quality with a large reduction in the amount of extracolonic components over our previously used technique. The new segmentation improves the specificity of our computer-aided polyp detection scheme significantly without any degradation in detection sensitivity.


Investigative Radiology | 1984

Timing in the normal pharyngeal swallow. Prospective selection and evaluation of 16 normal asymptomatic patients.

David J. Curtis; David F. Cruess; Abraham H. Dachman; Eugene Maso

A review of timing of pharyngeal events with radiography has been made. A prospective selection of normal asymptomatic patients presenting for a gastrointestinal evaluation was made and timing of 55 events in the videorecorded pharyngeal swallow in these patients was performed. Only 16 normal asymptomatic patients as defined for selection were found among 870 patients presenting for gastroesophageal examination. A detailed description of their timing observations is presented. The timing data were used to temporally order events in the pharyngeal swallow. This ordering of events in the pharyngeal swallow and the data upon which it is based are reported here in detail.


Journal of Computer Assisted Tomography | 2001

Automated segmentation of colonic walls for computerized detection of polyps in CT colonography

Yoshitaka Masutani; Hiroyuki Yoshida; Peter MacEneaney; Abraham H. Dachman

Purpose A new method for fully automated segmentation of the colonic walls in volumetric CT data was developed for limitation of the search space in computerized detection of polyps. Method For reliable segmentation, an anatomy-oriented approach was used, in which several anatomical structures are segmented in addition to the colon for utilization of their properties. Results The segmentation method was validated by use of 14 data sets, consisting of cases positive for colonic polyps. We found that the segmented colonic walls included all of the polyps. A subjective rating of the results was performed based on several criteria for visualization of anatomic detail of the colonic wall and mucosal surface. Except for a few cases in which insufflation of the colon was insufficient, all of the results included >95% of the colonic walls. Conclusion This method for colonic wall segmentation is reliable and the segmentation results are applicable in both visualization of the colon and computer-aided diagnosis in the detection of polyps in CT colonography.


Radiologic Clinics of North America | 2003

Virtual colonoscopy: past, present, and future

Abraham H. Dachman; Hiro Yoshida

Virtual colonoscopy is developing into a practical clinical technique. The issues of the steep learning curve and accuracy of the technique are undergoing advances related to patient preparation, scanning technique, reading methods, and CAD. It is probably the best test for patients with an incomplete colonoscopy or for those patients who cannot undergo colonoscopy. Its precise role in screening average-risk patients for colon cancer remains to be defined by ongoing research and clinical trials.


Cancer | 2001

Tumor size on computed tomography scans

Abraham H. Dachman; Peter MacEneaney; Adeyinka Adedipe; Michael Carlin; L. Phillip Schumm

Bidimensional tumor measurements are used routinely as surrogates for tumor volume. The purpose this study was to determine whether there is any added benefit in bidimensional or tridimensional measurements over a unidimensional measurement.


Medical Physics | 2004

Computerized detection of colorectal masses in CT colonography based on fuzzy merging and wall-thickening analysis.

Janne Näppi; Hans Frimmel; Abraham H. Dachman; Hiroyuki Yoshida

In recent years, several computer-aided detection (CAD) schemes have been developed for the detection of polyps in CT colonography (CTC). However, few studies have addressed the problem of computerized detection of colorectal masses in CTC. This is mostly because masses are considered to be well visualized by a radiologist because of their size and invasiveness. Nevertheless, the automated detection of masses would naturally complement the automated detection of polyps in CTC and would produce a more comprehensive computer aid to radiologists. Therefore, in this study, we identified some of the problems involved with the computerized detection of masses, and we developed a scheme for the computerized detection of masses that can be integrated into a CAD scheme for the detection of polyps. The performance of the mass detection scheme was evaluated by application to clinical CTC data sets. CTC was performed on 82 patients with helical CT scanners and reconstruction intervals of 1.0-5.0 mm in the supine and prone positions. Fourteen patients (17%) had a total of 14 masses of 30-50 mm, and sixteen patients (20%) had a total of 30 polyps 5-25 mm in diameter. Four patients had both polyps and masses. Fifty-six of the patients (68%) were normal. The CTC data were interpolated linearly to yield isotropic data sets, and the colon was extracted by use of a knowledge-guided segmentation technique. Two methods, fuzzy merging and wall-thickening analysis, were developed for the detection of masses. The fuzzy merging method detected masses with a significant intraluminal component by separating the initial CAD detections of locally cap-like shapes within the colonic wall into mass candidates and polyp candidates. The wall-thickening analysis detected nonintraluminal masses by searching the colonic wall for abnormal thickening. The final regions of the mass candidates were extracted by use of a level set method based on a fast marching algorithm. False-positive (FP) detections were reduced by a quadratic discriminant classifier. The performance of the scheme was evaluated by use of a leave-one-out (round-robin) method with by-patient elimination. All but one of the 14 masses, which was partially cut off from the CTC data set in both supine and prone positions, were detected. The fuzzy merging method detected 11 of the masses, and the wall-thickening analysis detected 3 of the masses including all nonintraluminal masses. In combination, the two methods detected 13 of the 14 masses with 0.21 FPs per patient on average based on the leave-one-out evaluation. Most FPs were generated by extrinsic compression of the colonic wall that would be recognized easily and quickly by a radiologist. The mass detection methods did not affect the result of the polyp detection. The results indicate that the scheme is potentially useful in providing a high-performance CAD scheme for the detection of colorectal neoplasms in CTC.

Collaboration


Dive into the Abraham H. Dachman's collaboration.

Top Co-Authors

Avatar
Top Co-Authors

Avatar
Top Co-Authors

Avatar

Kenji Suzuki

Illinois Institute of Technology

View shared research outputs
Top Co-Authors

Avatar
Top Co-Authors

Avatar
Top Co-Authors

Avatar

Judy Yee

University of California

View shared research outputs
Top Co-Authors

Avatar
Top Co-Authors

Avatar
Top Co-Authors

Avatar

Don C. Rockey

University of Texas Southwestern Medical Center

View shared research outputs
Top Co-Authors

Avatar

Robert A. Halvorsen

Virginia Commonwealth University

View shared research outputs
Researchain Logo
Decentralizing Knowledge