Burling David, Halligan Steve, Altman Douglas G, Atkin Wendy, Bartram Clive, Fenlon Helen, Laghi Andrea, Stoker Jaap, Taylor Stuart, Frost Roger, Dessey Guido, De Villiers Melinda, Florie Jasper, Foley Shane, Honeyfield Lesley, Iannaccone Riccardo, Gallo Teresa, Kay Clive, Lefere Philippe, Lowe Andrew, Mangiapane Filipo, Marrannes Jesse, Neri Emmanuele, Nieddu Giulia, Nicholson David, O'Hare Alan, Ori Sante, Politi Benedetta, Poulus Martin, Regge Daniele, Renaut Lisa, Rudralingham Velauthan, Signoretta Saverio, Vagli Paola, Van der Hulst Victor, Williams-Butt Jane
Intestinal Imaging Centre, St. Marks Hospital, London, UK.
Eur Radiol. 2006 Aug;16(8):1737-44. doi: 10.1007/s00330-006-0189-2. Epub 2006 Apr 25.
The extent measurement error on CT colonography influences polyp categorisation according to established management guidelines is studied using twenty-eight observers of varying experience to classify polyps seen at CT colonography as either 'medium' (maximal diameter 6-9 mm) or 'large' (maximal diameter 10 mm or larger). Comparison was then made with the reference diameter obtained in each patient via colonoscopy. The Bland-Altman method was used to assess agreement between observer measurements and colonoscopy, and differences in measurement and categorisation was assessed using Kruskal-Wallis and Chi-squared test statistics respectively. Observer measurements on average underestimated the diameter of polyps when compared to the reference value, by approximately 2-3 mm, irrespective of observer experience. Ninety-five percent limits of agreement were relatively wide for all observer groups, and had sufficient span to encompass different size categories for polyps. There were 167 polyp observations and 135 (81%) were correctly categorised. Of the 32 observations that were miscategorised, 5 (16%) were overestimations and 27 (84%) were underestimations (i.e. large polyps misclassified as medium). Caution should be exercised for polyps whose colonographic diameter is below but close to the 1-cm boundary threshold in order to avoid potential miscategorisation of advanced adenomas.
本研究利用28名经验各异的观察者,将CT结肠成像中所见息肉分类为“中等”(最大直径6 - 9毫米)或“大”(最大直径10毫米或更大),以探讨CT结肠成像上的范围测量误差对根据既定管理指南进行的息肉分类的影响。然后将其与通过结肠镜检查在每位患者中获得的参考直径进行比较。采用Bland - Altman方法评估观察者测量值与结肠镜检查之间的一致性,并分别使用Kruskal - Wallis检验统计量和卡方检验统计量评估测量和分类的差异。与参考值相比,无论观察者经验如何,观察者测量值平均低估息肉直径约2 - 3毫米。所有观察者组的95%一致性界限相对较宽,且跨度足以涵盖息肉的不同大小类别。共有167次息肉观察,其中135次(81%)分类正确。在32次错误分类的观察中,5次(16%)为高估,27次(84%)为低估(即将大息肉误分类为中等)。对于结肠成像直径低于但接近1厘米边界阈值的息肉应谨慎处理,以避免晚期腺瘤的潜在误分类。