Suppr超能文献

外周动脉疾病中对比增强三维磁共振血管造影和多层螺旋CT血管造影解读的观察者间一致性

Interobserver agreement for the interpretation of contrast-enhanced 3D MR angiography and MDCT angiography in peripheral arterial disease.

作者信息

Ouwendijk Rody, Kock Marc C J M, Visser Karen, Pattynama Peter M T, de Haan Michiel W, Hunink Myriam G M

机构信息

Department of Radiology, Erasmus Medical Center, Dr. Molewaterplein 50, Rm. Ee 2118, 3015 GE Rotterdam, The Netherlands.

出版信息

AJR Am J Roentgenol. 2005 Nov;185(5):1261-7. doi: 10.2214/AJR.04.1296.

Abstract

OBJECTIVE

The objective of our study was to compare interobserver agreement for interpretations of contrast-enhanced 3D MR angiography and MDCT angiography in patients with peripheral arterial disease.

SUBJECTS AND METHODS

Of 226 eligible patients, 69 were excluded. The remaining 157 consecutive patients were prospectively randomized to either MR angiography (n = 78) or MDCT angiography (n = 79). Two observers independently evaluated for arterial stenosis or occlusion on MR angiography (2,157 segments) and MDCT angiography (2,419 segments) using a 5-point ordinal scale. Vessel wall calcifications were noted. Interobserver agreement for each technique was evaluated with a weighted kappa (kappa(w)) statistic.

RESULTS

Although interobserver agreement for both was excellent, the interobserver agreement for MR angiography (kappa(w) = 0.90; 95% confidence interval [CI], 0.89-0.92) was higher than that for MDCT angiography (kappa(w) = 0.85; 95% CI, 0.83-0.86) for reporting the degree of arterial stenosis or occlusion in all segments. For the different anatomic locations, the interobserver agreement for MR angiography versus MDCT angiography was as follows: aortoiliac (kappa(w) =0.91 vs 0.84, respectively), femoropopliteal (kappa(w) = 0.91 vs 0.87), and crural (kappa(w) = 0.90 vs 0.83) segments. The interobserver agreement of MDCT angiography significantly decreased in the presence of calcifications but was still good for all anatomic locations. The lowest agreement was found for crural segments in the presence of calcifications (kappa(w) = 0.67). With MR angiography, there were 12 times more nondiagnostic segments than with MDCT angiography (81 vs 7, respectively).

CONCLUSION

Interpretations of MR angiography and MDCT angiography for peripheral arterial disease have an excellent interobserver agreement. MR angiography has a higher interobserver agreement than MDCT angiography, and the presence of calcified segments significantly decreases interobserver agreement for MDCT angiography.

摘要

目的

我们研究的目的是比较外周动脉疾病患者中,观察者间对对比增强三维磁共振血管造影(3D MR angiography)和多层螺旋CT血管造影(MDCT angiography)解读的一致性。

受试者与方法

226例符合条件的患者中,69例被排除。其余157例连续患者被前瞻性随机分为磁共振血管造影组(n = 78)或多层螺旋CT血管造影组(n = 79)。两名观察者使用5分序贯量表,分别独立评估磁共振血管造影(2157段)和多层螺旋CT血管造影(2419段)中的动脉狭窄或闭塞情况,并记录血管壁钙化情况。采用加权kappa(kappa(w))统计量评估每种技术的观察者间一致性。

结果

尽管两种检查的观察者间一致性均极佳,但在报告所有节段的动脉狭窄或闭塞程度时,磁共振血管造影的观察者间一致性(kappa(w) = 0.90;95%置信区间[CI],0.89 - 0.92)高于多层螺旋CT血管造影(kappa(w) = 0.85;95% CI,0.83 - 0.86)。对于不同解剖部位,磁共振血管造影与多层螺旋CT血管造影的观察者间一致性如下:腹主动脉 - 髂动脉段(kappa(w)分别为0.91和0.84)、股 - 腘动脉段(kappa(w)分别为0.91和0.87)以及小腿段(kappa(w)分别为0.90和0.83)。多层螺旋CT血管造影在存在钙化时观察者间一致性显著降低,但在所有解剖部位仍良好。在存在钙化的小腿段一致性最低(kappa(w) = 0.67)。磁共振血管造影的非诊断性节段比多层螺旋CT血管造影多12倍(分别为81段和7段)。

结论

外周动脉疾病的磁共振血管造影和多层螺旋CT血管造影解读具有极佳的观察者间一致性。磁共振血管造影的观察者间一致性高于多层螺旋CT血管造影,钙化节段的存在显著降低了多层螺旋CT血管造影的观察者间一致性。

文献AI研究员

20分钟写一篇综述,助力文献阅读效率提升50倍。

立即体验

用中文搜PubMed

大模型驱动的PubMed中文搜索引擎

马上搜索

文档翻译

学术文献翻译模型,支持多种主流文档格式。

立即体验