Suppr超能文献

在一家获得国际血管实验室认可委员会(ICAVL)认可的血管实验室中,技术人员之间颈动脉多普勒峰值流速测量的观察者间变异性。

Interobserver variability of carotid Doppler peak velocity measurements among technologists in an ICAVL-accredited vascular laboratory.

作者信息

Corriveau Marc M, Johnston K Wayne

机构信息

Department of Surgery, McGill University and Royal Victoria Hospital, Montreal, Quebec, Canada.

出版信息

J Vasc Surg. 2004 Apr;39(4):735-41. doi: 10.1016/j.jvs.2003.12.017.

Abstract

OBJECTIVE

This study was designed to investigate interobserver variability in the measurement of internal carotid artery (ICA) peak systolic velocity (PSV). We hypothesize that the reproducibility of repeated duplex scanning parameters, in the hands of very experienced vascular technologists in a laboratory accredited by the Intersocietal Commission for Accreditation of Vascular Laboratories, would be excellent.

METHODS

Thirty-one patients underwent carotid duplex scanning by three vascular technologists using the same duplex scanning system. They examined patients with the laboratory's standard protocol. Statistical analysis of the sources of variation was carried out with two-way analysis of variance. The Altman-Bland method was used to detect bias and evaluate the interval of agreement between technologists for the ICA PSV on a continuous scale. The kappa statistic enabled measurement of agreement for ICA PSV on a categorical scale of stenosis (<50%, 50%-70%, >70%).

RESULTS

Patient variability was responsible for 97.2% of the total variance, with only 0.58% (P<.005) attributed to the technologists. The level of agreement on a continuous scale between the measurements of ICA PSV by our technologists is wide. For individual patients it ranged from -25% to 43% between technologists A and B, -27% to 43% between technologists A and C, and -27% to 31% between technologists B and C. When we compared the three technologists, no systematic overestimation or underestimation of the ICA PSV was found (ie, no fixed bias). The level of agreement between the technologists did not depend on the value of the PSV (ie, no proportional bias). However, analysis of ICA PSV agreement on a categorical scale revealed almost perfect agreement (kappa>0.8).

CONCLUSION

From measurements of PSV, the severity of carotid stenosis can be reproducibly categorized into ranges (<50%, 50%-70%, >70). However, the unacceptably wide interobserver variation of ICA PSV on a continuous scale makes the interchangeability of our technologists' measurements problematic for clinical use, as in determination of progression of severity of stenosis. When an ICA PSV measurement is in the vicinity of a cutoff value, the diagnostic accuracy may be improved with the use of additional diagnostic testing.

摘要

目的

本研究旨在调查颈内动脉(ICA)收缩期峰值流速(PSV)测量中的观察者间变异性。我们假设,在经血管实验室间认证委员会认可的实验室中,由经验丰富的血管技术专家进行重复的双功扫描参数测量,其可重复性将非常出色。

方法

31例患者由三名血管技术专家使用同一双功扫描系统进行颈动脉双功扫描。他们按照实验室的标准方案对患者进行检查。采用双向方差分析对变异来源进行统计分析。使用Altman-Bland方法检测偏倚,并以连续尺度评估技术专家之间ICA PSV的一致性区间。kappa统计量用于在狭窄的分类尺度(<50%、50%-70%、>70%)上测量ICA PSV的一致性。

结果

患者变异性占总变异的97.2%,技术专家的变异仅占0.58%(P<0.005)。我们的技术专家对ICA PSV测量值在连续尺度上的一致性水平较宽。对于个体患者,技术专家A和B之间的差异范围为-25%至43%,技术专家A和C之间为-27%至43%,技术专家B和C之间为-27%至31%。当我们比较这三名技术专家时,未发现ICA PSV存在系统性高估或低估(即无固定偏倚)。技术专家之间的一致性水平不取决于PSV值(即无比例偏倚)。然而,对ICA PSV在分类尺度上的一致性分析显示几乎完全一致(kappa>0.8)。

结论

根据PSV测量值,颈动脉狭窄的严重程度可重复分类为不同范围(<50%、50%-70%、>70%)。然而,ICA PSV在连续尺度上观察者间变异过大,导致我们技术专家的测量值在临床应用中(如确定狭窄严重程度的进展)难以互换。当ICA PSV测量值接近临界值时,使用额外的诊断测试可能会提高诊断准确性。

文献检索

告别复杂PubMed语法,用中文像聊天一样搜索,搜遍4000万医学文献。AI智能推荐,让科研检索更轻松。

立即免费搜索

文件翻译

保留排版,准确专业,支持PDF/Word/PPT等文件格式,支持 12+语言互译。

免费翻译文档

深度研究

AI帮你快速写综述,25分钟生成高质量综述,智能提取关键信息,辅助科研写作。

立即免费体验