Suppr超能文献

骶髂关节骨盆平片临床实践与中央阅片培训在阅片上的一致性。DESIR 队列研究结果。

Agreement between clinical practice and trained central reading in reading of sacroiliac joints on plain pelvic radiographs. Results from the DESIR cohort.

机构信息

Leiden University Medical Center, Leiden, The Netherlands.

出版信息

Arthritis Rheumatol. 2014 Sep;66(9):2403-11. doi: 10.1002/art.38738.

Abstract

OBJECTIVE

To investigate the degree of agreement between local rheumatologists/radiologists and central trained readers (external standard) on the presence/absence of sacroiliitis on radiographs of the sacroiliac (SI) joints.

METHODS

Patients with inflammatory back pain (duration ≥3 months but <3 years) suggestive of axial spondyloarthritis (SpA) were included in the Devenir des Spondylarthropathies Indifferérenciées Récentes (DESIR) cohort. Baseline radiographs of the SI joints were interpreted by 2 central readers (modified New York criteria); cases of disagreement were adjudicated by a third reader, yielding a positive or a negative result (central reading). The same radiographs were also interpreted by local radiologists/rheumatologists and were rated as "normal," "doubtful sacroiliitis," "obvious sacroiliitis," or "SI joint fusion" (local reading); positive findings were defined as "at least unilateral obvious sacroiliitis," "bilateral obvious sacroiliitis," or "at least unilateral fusion." Agreement and misclassifications between central readers and between central reading versus local reading were calculated (kappa values).

RESULTS

Interreader agreement between the central readers was moderate (κ = 0.54); 108 of 688 radiographs (15.7%) were adjudicated. According to local reading ("at least unilateral obvious sacroiliitis"), 183 of the 688 patients (26.6%) had sacroiliitis, whereas according to central reading, 145 of 688 patients (21.1%) had sacroiliitis. Agreement between local reading and central reading was also moderate (κ = 0.55); 76 of 183 patients (41.5%) with "at least unilateral obvious sacroiliitis" (positive by local reading) and 32 of 109 patients (29.4%) with "bilateral obvious sacroiliitis" or "at least unilateral fusion" (positive by local reading) were rated as "negative" by central reading, and 38 of 505 patients (7.5%) and 68 of 579 patients (11.7%), respectively, without sacroiliitis (negative by local reading) were interpreted as "positive" by central reading.

CONCLUSION

In patients with recent-onset inflammatory back pain, both trained readers and local rheumatologists/radiologists agreed only moderately on the recognition of radiographic sacroiliitis. A significant proportion of locally recognized ankylosing spondylitis (AS) patients were not confirmed as having AS by central reading (false positive), while a small minority of patients were false negative, indicating the necessity of reevaluating the role of radiographic sacroiliitis as diagnostic criterion for axial SpA.

摘要

目的

调查当地风湿病学家/放射科医生与中心培训读者(外部标准)在骶髂(SI)关节放射照片上存在/不存在骶髂关节炎的一致性程度。

方法

将炎症性背痛(持续时间≥3 个月但<3 年)且疑似轴性脊柱关节炎(SpA)的患者纳入新近发生的未分化脊柱关节炎的演变(DESIR)队列。由 2 名中心读者(改良纽约标准)解读 SI 关节的基线放射照片;对意见不一致的病例,由第三位读者进行裁决,得出阳性或阴性结果(中心阅读)。同样的放射照片也由当地放射科医生/风湿病学家进行解读,并被评为“正常”、“可疑骶髂关节炎”、“明显骶髂关节炎”或“SI 关节融合”(局部阅读);阳性发现定义为“至少单侧明显骶髂关节炎”、“双侧明显骶髂关节炎”或“至少单侧融合”。计算了中心读者之间以及中心阅读与局部阅读之间的一致性和错误分类(kappa 值)。

结果

中心读者之间的读者间一致性为中度(κ=0.54);对 688 张放射照片中的 108 张(15.7%)进行了裁决。根据局部阅读(“至少单侧明显骶髂关节炎”),688 例患者中有 183 例(26.6%)患有骶髂关节炎,而根据中心阅读,688 例患者中有 145 例(21.1%)患有骶髂关节炎。局部阅读和中心阅读之间的一致性也为中度(κ=0.55);在 183 例“至少单侧明显骶髂关节炎”(局部阅读阳性)患者中,有 76 例(41.5%)和 32 例(29.4%)在“双侧明显骶髂关节炎”或“至少单侧融合”(局部阅读阳性)的患者被中心阅读评为“阴性”,在 505 例无骶髂关节炎(局部阅读阴性)患者中,有 38 例(7.5%)和 68 例(11.7%)被中心阅读评为“阳性”。

结论

在新近发生炎症性背痛的患者中,受过培训的读者和当地风湿病学家/放射科医生对放射学骶髂关节炎的识别仅达成中度一致。大量局部认定的强直性脊柱炎(AS)患者未被中心阅读确认为 AS(假阳性),而少数患者为假阴性,这表明有必要重新评估放射学骶髂关节炎作为轴性 SpA 诊断标准的作用。

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