Inter- and Intrarater Agreement on the Outcome of Endovascular Treatment of Aneurysms Using MRA.

AJNR Am J Neuroradiol

From the Department of Radiology (S.J., R.F., J.-C.G., L.L.-G., A.W., D.R., J.R.), Centre Hospitalier de l'Université de Montréal, Notre-Dame Hospital, Montreal, Quebec, Canada

Published: May 2016

AI Article Synopsis

  • * A group of 15 neuroradiologists evaluated 120 images from 56 patients, assessing major recurrences and classifying results from multiple imaging studies, revealing significant variability in their assessments.
  • * The findings indicate moderate to substantial agreement among raters, especially when determining major recurrences, highlighting challenges in consistently evaluating endovascular treatment outcomes.

Article Abstract

Background And Purpose: Patients treated with coiling are often followed by MR angiography. Our objective was to assess the inter- and intraobserver agreement in diagnosing aneurysm remnants and recurrences by using multimodality imaging, including TOF MRA.

Materials And Methods: A portfolio composed of 120 selected images from 56 patients was sent to 15 neuroradiologists from 10 institutions. For each case, raters were asked to classify angiographic results (3 classes) of 2 studies (32 MRA-MRA and 24 DSA-MRA pairs) and to provide a final judgment regarding the presence of a recurrence (no, minor, major). Six raters were asked to independently review the portfolio twice. A second study, restricted to 4 raters having full access to all images, was designed to validate the results of the electronic survey.

Results: The proportion of cases judged to have a major recurrence varied between 16.1% and 71.4% (mean, 35.0% ± 12.7%). There was moderate agreement overall (κ = 0.474 ± 0.009), increasing to nearly substantial (κ = 0.581 ± 0.014) when the judgment was dichotomized (presence or absence of a major recurrence). Agreement on cases followed-up by MRA-MRA was similarly substantial (κ = 0.601 ± 0.018). The intrarater agreement varied between fair (κ = 0.257 ± 0.093) and substantial (κ= 0.699 ± 0.084), improving with a dichotomized judgment concerning MRA-MRA comparisons. Agreement was no better when raters had access to all images.

Conclusions: There is an important variability in the assessment of angiographic outcomes of endovascular treatments. Agreement on the presence of a major recurrence when comparing 2 MRA studies or the MRA with the last catheter angiographic study can be substantial.

Download full-text PDF

Source
http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC7960328PMC
http://dx.doi.org/10.3174/ajnr.A4609DOI Listing

Publication Analysis

Top Keywords

major recurrence
12
intrarater agreement
8
raters asked
8
agreement
7
inter- intrarater
4
agreement outcome
4
outcome endovascular
4
endovascular treatment
4
treatment aneurysms
4
aneurysms mra
4

Similar Publications

Want AI Summaries of new PubMed Abstracts delivered to your In-box?

Enter search terms and have AI summaries delivered each week - change queries or unsubscribe any time!