Computer-aided diagnosis in medical imaging: Review of legal barriers to entry for the commercial systems

The goal of this paper is to explore whether the premarket regulatory system of the United States functions ideally in facing the emergence of commercial computer-aided diagnosis (CAD) systems for medical imaging. To outline the commercial CAD systems available in the United States, clinical trials published in PubMed and EMBASE from 2012 to 2016 that investigated the clinical competence of commercial CAD products were obtained, and the product information provided in these studies was searched in the Establishment Registration & Device Listing database, the Releasable 510(k) Premarket Notification database, and the Premarket Approval (PMA) database of the FDA to trace the processes through which such CAD systems entered the healthcare market. A review of current premarket regulatory system for medical devices, and the potential problems that may hinder the social and clinical integration of CAD systems are presented. We noticed expansion of regulatory definition and variation of device classes and product codes among CAD systems with similar clinical uses, which may compromise the efficacy of such regulatory controls. The results suggested ineffectiveness of current premarket regulatory controls for CAD systems in the United States.

[1]  Is It Time to Stop Paying for Computer-Aided Mammography? , 2015, JAMA internal medicine.

[2]  P. Taylor,et al.  A systematic review of computer-assisted diagnosis in diagnostic cancer imaging. , 2012, European journal of radiology.

[3]  Matthew S Davenport,et al.  Reproducibility of dynamic contrast-enhanced MR imaging. Part I. Perfusion characteristics in the female pelvis by using multiple computer-aided diagnosis perfusion analysis solutions. , 2013, Radiology.

[4]  Hiroyuki Yoshida,et al.  Diagnostic Accuracy of Laxative-Free Computed Tomographic Colonography for Detection of Adenomatous Polyps in Asymptomatic Adults , 2012, Annals of Internal Medicine.

[5]  Jianhua Yao,et al.  Integration of PACS and CAD systems using DICOMDIR and open-source tools , 2013, Medical Imaging.

[6]  Janice Honeyman-Buck Transforming the radiological interpretation process: TRIP - Where are we now? , 2010, Medical Imaging.

[7]  Isabelle Borget,et al.  Evaluation of the accuracy of a computer-aided diagnosis (CAD) system in breast ultrasound according to the radiologist's experience. , 2012, Academic radiology.

[8]  A. Modak Regulatory issues on breath tests and updates of recent advances on [13C]-breath tests , 2013, Journal of breath research.

[9]  Stuart A. Taylor,et al.  Appearances of screen-detected versus symptomatic colorectal cancers at CT colonography , 2016, European Radiology.

[10]  Alexander Schick,et al.  Comparison of dual-energy subtraction and electronic bone suppression combined with computer-aided detection on chest radiographs: effect on human observers' performance in nodule detection. , 2013, AJR. American journal of roentgenology.

[11]  C. Lehman,et al.  Diagnostic Accuracy of Digital Screening Mammography With and Without Computer-Aided Detection. , 2015, JAMA internal medicine.

[12]  K. Doi,et al.  Current status and future potential of computer-aided diagnosis in medical imaging. , 2005, The British journal of radiology.

[13]  Sophia Zackrisson,et al.  Is single reading with computer-aided detection (CAD) as good as double reading in mammography screening? A systematic review , 2012, BMC Medical Imaging.

[14]  M. Yaffe,et al.  Impact of computer-aided detection systems on radiologist accuracy with digital mammography. , 2014, AJR. American journal of roentgenology.