Galloy M-A, Guillemin F, Couture A, Pracros J-P, Didier F, Ducou Le Pointe H, Pefoubou Y, Aubert D, Lortat-Jacob S, Roederer T, Claudon M
Radiology, INSERM, ERI 13, Children's University Hospital Nancy.
Ultraschall Med. 2008 Feb;29(1):53-9. doi: 10.1055/s-2007-963738. Epub 2007 Dec 21.
To evaluate the accuracy of voiding urosonography (VUS) compared to X-ray voiding cystoureterography (VCUG) for the detection and grading of vesicoureteral reflux (VUR) by standardised reading of digital clips obtained from VUS and digital images from VCUG.
Approval by the ethics committee was obtained, and written, informed consent was given. 130 children (94 girls and 36 boys, mean age of 4.4 years) underwent VUS using Levovist (Schering, Germany) prior to VCUG. Digital VUS clips and digital VCUG images were reviewed by two groups of two radiologists. Results were mainly analysed in terms of reno-ureteral units (RUUs). Intra and interobserver reproducibility was estimated by calculation of kappa coefficient. Calculation of sensitivity and specificity of VUS was made in comparison with VCUG.
Intraobserver reproducibility was good to moderate for the detection of VUR using VUS (kappa = 0.67 and 0.53 for each reviewer respectively) and good for the grading of reflux (kappa = 0.64 and 0.70). Interobserver reproducibility was excellent for the detection and grading of VUR using VCUG (kappa = 0.89 and 0.91) but good to moderate for VUS (kappa = 0.73 and 0.51). Compared to VCUG, sensitivity and specificity of VUS for the detection of VUR were 62.7 % and 83.4 %. Concordance for grading was moderate, with a higher grading using VUS.
Real-time evaluation and diagnosis based on the review of VUS digital clips is achievable. However, there is a need for standardisation of digital records if a second reading by another radiologist or consideration by urologists is needed. Recent advances in US technology and the use of second-generation contrast agents would be promising to improve the feasibility, reproducibility and accuracy of the method.
通过对从排尿超声(VUS)获得的数字片段和排尿性膀胱输尿管造影(VCUG)的数字图像进行标准化解读,评估排尿超声(VUS)与X线排尿性膀胱输尿管造影(VCUG)相比在检测膀胱输尿管反流(VUR)及其分级方面的准确性。
获得伦理委员会批准,并取得书面知情同意书。130名儿童(94名女孩和36名男孩,平均年龄4.4岁)在进行VCUG之前使用声诺维(德国先灵公司)接受了VUS检查。两组各两名放射科医生对VUS数字片段和VCUG数字图像进行了评估。结果主要根据肾输尿管单位(RUUs)进行分析。通过计算kappa系数评估观察者内和观察者间的可重复性。与VCUG相比,计算VUS的敏感性和特异性。
使用VUS检测VUR时,观察者内可重复性良好至中等(每位评估者的kappa分别为0.67和0.53),反流分级的可重复性良好(kappa分别为0.64和0.70)。使用VCUG检测和分级VUR时,观察者间可重复性极佳(kappa分别为0.89和0.91),而VUS的观察者间可重复性良好至中等(kappa分别为0.73和0.51)。与VCUG相比,VUS检测VUR的敏感性和特异性分别为62.7%和83.4%。分级的一致性中等,VUS分级更高。
基于VUS数字片段评估进行实时评估和诊断是可行的。然而,如果需要另一位放射科医生进行二次解读或泌尿科医生进行会诊,则需要对数字记录进行标准化。超声技术的最新进展和第二代造影剂的使用有望提高该方法的可行性、可重复性和准确性。