Bonasia Davide Edoardo, Marmotti Antongiulio, Massa Alessandro Domenico Felice, Ferro Andrea, Blonna Davide, Castoldi Filippo, Rossi Roberto
AO Citta' della Salute e della Scienza, Azienda Ospedaliera CTO, Universita' degli Studi di Torino, Via Lamarmora 26, 10128, Turin, Italy,
Knee Surg Sports Traumatol Arthrosc. 2015 Sep;23(9):2484-93. doi: 10.1007/s00167-014-2975-8. Epub 2014 Apr 9.
In the last two decades, many surgical techniques have been described for articular cartilage repair. Reliable histological scoring systems are fundamental tools to evaluate new procedures. Several histological scoring systems have been described, and these can be divided in elementary and comprehensive scores, according to the number of sub-items. The aim of this study was to test the inter- and intra-observer reliability of ten main scores used for the histological evaluation of in vivo cartilage repair. The authors tested the starting hypothesis that elementary scores would show superior intra- and inter-observer reliability compared with comprehensive scores.
Fifty histological sections obtained from the trochlea of New Zealand Rabbit and stained with Safranin-O fast green were used. The histological sections were analysed by 4 observers: 2 experienced in cartilage histology and 2 inexperienced. Histological evaluations were performed at time 1 and time 2, separated by a 30-day interval. The following scores were used: Mankin, O'Driscoll, Pineda, Wakitani, Fortier, Selleres, ICRS, ICRSII, Oswestry (OsScore) and modified O'Driscoll. Intra- and inter-observer reliability were evaluated for each score. In addition, the pavement-ceiling effect and the Bland-Altman Coefficient of Repeatability were then evaluated for each sub-item of every score.
Intra-observer reliability was high for all observers in every score, even though the reliability was significantly lower for non-expert observers compared with expert counterparts. In terms of Coefficient of Repeatability, some scores performed better (O'Driscoll, Modified O'Driscoll and ICRSII) than others (Fortier, Seller). Inter-observer reliability was high for all observers in every score, but significantly lower for non-expert compared with expert observers.
In expert hands, all the scores showed high intra- and inter-observer reliability, independently of the complexity. Although every score has advantages and disadvantages, ICRSII, O'Driscoll and Modified O'Driscoll scores should be preferred for the evaluation of in vivo cartilage repair in animal models.
在过去二十年中,已描述了多种用于关节软骨修复的手术技术。可靠的组织学评分系统是评估新手术方法的基本工具。已描述了几种组织学评分系统,根据子项目数量可分为基本评分和综合评分。本研究的目的是测试用于体内软骨修复组织学评估的十种主要评分的观察者间和观察者内可靠性。作者检验了最初的假设,即与综合评分相比,基本评分将显示出更高的观察者内和观察者间可靠性。
使用从新西兰兔滑车获取的50个组织学切片,并用番红O固绿染色。4名观察者对组织学切片进行分析:2名有软骨组织学经验,2名无经验。在时间1和时间2进行组织学评估,间隔30天。使用以下评分:曼金(Mankin)、奥德里斯科尔(O'Driscoll)、皮内达(Pineda)、若谷(Wakitani)、福捷(Fortier)、塞勒斯(Selleres)、国际软骨修复协会(ICRS)、国际软骨修复协会第二版(ICRSII)、奥斯韦斯特里(Oswestry,OsScore)和改良奥德里斯科尔评分。对每个评分评估观察者内和观察者间可靠性。此外,然后对每个评分的每个子项目评估天花板效应和布兰德-奥特曼重复性系数。
每个评分中所有观察者的观察者内可靠性都很高,尽管与专家观察者相比,非专家观察者的可靠性明显较低。就重复性系数而言,一些评分(奥德里斯科尔、改良奥德里斯科尔和ICRSII)比其他评分(福捷、塞勒斯)表现更好。每个评分中所有观察者的观察者间可靠性都很高,但与专家观察者相比,非专家观察者的可靠性明显较低。
在专家手中,所有评分均显示出较高的观察者内和观察者间可靠性,与复杂性无关。尽管每个评分都有优缺点,但在评估动物模型中的体内软骨修复时,应首选ICRSII、奥德里斯科尔和改良奥德里斯科尔评分。