J Bone Joint Surg Am. 2007 Oct;89(10):2113-23. doi: 10.2106/JBJS.F.01530.
Providing the best treatment options and appropriate prognostic information to patients with cartilaginous neoplasms of long bones depends on distinguishing benign from malignant lesions. Correlative interpretation of imaging, histopathology, and clinical information is the current method for making this distinction, yet the reliability of this approach has not been critically evaluated. This study quantifies the interobserver reliability of the determination of grade for cartilaginous neoplasms among a group of experienced musculoskeletal pathologists and radiologists.
Nine recognized musculoskeletal pathologists and eight recognized musculoskeletal radiologists reviewed forty-six consecutive cases of cartilaginous lesions in long bones that underwent open biopsy or intralesional curettage. All diagnosticians had a bulleted history and preoperative conventional radiographs for review. Pathologists reviewed the original hematoxylin and eosin-stained glass slides from each case. Radiologists reviewed any additional imaging that was available, variably including serial radiographs, magnetic resonance imaging, and computed tomography scans. Each diagnostician classified a lesion as benign, low-grade malignant, or high-grade malignant. Kappa coefficients were calculated as a measure of reliability.
Kappa coefficients for interrater reliability were 0.443 for the pathologists and 0.345 for the radiologists (p < 0.0001 for both). Kappa coefficients for a subgroup of cases determined to be high risk by subsequent clinical course were poorer at 0.236 and 0.206, respectively (p < 0.0001 for both). Slightly improved agreement among radiologists was noted for the twenty lesions that had magnetic resonance imaging available (Kappa = 0.437, p < 0.0001), but not for the lesions analyzed with serial plain radiographs or computed tomography scans.
This study demonstrates low reliability for the grading of cartilaginous lesions in long bones, even among specialized and experienced pathologists and radiologists. This included low reliability both in differentiating benign from malignant lesions and in differentiating high-grade from low-grade malignant lesions, both of which are critical to the safe treatment of these neoplasms. This may explain in part the wide variation in outcomes reported for chondrosarcomas treated in different medical centers. New diagnostic and grading strategies linked to protocol-driven treatments are needed, but they must be measured against the long-term gold standard of patient outcomes.
为长骨软骨肿瘤患者提供最佳治疗方案和适当的预后信息取决于区分良性和恶性病变。目前通过对影像学、组织病理学和临床信息进行相关解读来做出这种区分,但这种方法的可靠性尚未得到严格评估。本研究量化了一组经验丰富的肌肉骨骼病理学家和放射科医生对软骨肿瘤分级判定的观察者间可靠性。
9名公认的肌肉骨骼病理学家和8名公认的肌肉骨骼放射科医生对46例连续的长骨软骨病变病例进行了回顾,这些病例均接受了开放活检或病灶内刮除术。所有诊断医生都有简要病史和术前常规X线片以供查阅。病理学家复查了每个病例的原始苏木精和伊红染色玻片。放射科医生复查了所有可用的其他影像学资料,包括连续X线片、磁共振成像和计算机断层扫描。每位诊断医生将病变分类为良性、低级别恶性或高级别恶性。计算kappa系数作为可靠性的衡量指标。
病理学家的观察者间可靠性kappa系数为0.443,放射科医生为0.345(两者p均<0.0001)。根据后续临床病程判定为高风险的病例亚组的kappa系数分别较差,为0.236和0.206(两者p均<0.0001)。对于有磁共振成像资料的20个病变,放射科医生之间的一致性略有提高(kappa = 0.437,p < 0.0001),但对于通过连续平片或计算机断层扫描分析的病变则没有提高。
本研究表明,即使在专业且经验丰富的病理学家和放射科医生中,长骨软骨病变分级的可靠性也较低。这包括在区分良性与恶性病变以及区分高级别与低级别恶性病变方面的可靠性较低,而这两者对于这些肿瘤的安全治疗都至关重要。这可能部分解释了不同医疗中心报道的软骨肉瘤治疗结果的广泛差异。需要与方案驱动治疗相关的新诊断和分级策略,但必须根据患者预后的长期金标准进行衡量。