Suppr超能文献

2011 年和 2018 年 ATS/ERS/JRS/ALAT 标准对高分辨率 CT 上常见间质性肺炎的比较:一项横断面研究。

Comparison between the ATS/ERS/JRS/ALAT criteria of 2011 and 2018 for Usual Interstitial Pneumonia on HRCT: a cross-sectional study.

机构信息

Faculty of Medicine and Health Sciences, University of Antwerp, Universiteitsplein 1, 2610 Wilrijk, Belgium.

Department of Radiology, Middelheim Hospital ZNA, Lindendreef 1, 2020 Antwerp, Belgium.

出版信息

Br J Radiol. 2021 Apr 1;94(1120):20201159. doi: 10.1259/bjr.20201159. Epub 2021 Feb 4.

Abstract

OBJECTIVES

To determine whether the revised 2018 ATS/ERS/JRS/ALAT radiological criteria for usual interstitial pneumonia (UIP) provide better diagnostic agreement compared to the 2011 guidelines.

METHODS

Cohort for this cross-sectional study (single center, nonacademic) was recruited from a multidisciplinary team discussion (MDD) from July 2010 until November 2018, with clinical suspicion of fibrosing interstitial lung disease (= 325). Exclusion criteria were technical HRCT issues, known connective tissue disease (rheumatoid arthritis, systemic sclerosis, poly-or dermatomyositis), exposure to pulmonary toxins or lack of working diagnosis after MDD. Four readers with varying degrees in HRCT interpretation independently categorized 192 HRCTs, according to both the previous and current ATS/ERS/JRS/ALAT radiological criteria. An inter-rater variability analysis (Gwet's second-order agreement coefficient, AC2) was performed.

RESULTS

The resulting Gwet's AC2 for the 2011 and 2018 ATS/ERS/JRS/ALAT radiological criteria is 0.62 (±0.05) and 0.65 (±0.05), respectively. We report only minor differences in agreement level among the readers. Distribution according to the 2011 guidelines is as follows: 57.3% 'UIP pattern', 24% 'possible UIP pattern', 18.8% 'inconsistent with UIP pattern' and for the 2018 guidelines: 59.6% 'UIP', 14.5% 'probable UIP', 15.9% 'indeterminate for UIP' and 10% 'alternative diagnosis'.

CONCLUSIONS

No statistically significant higher degree of diagnostic agreement is observed when applying the revised 2018 ATS/ERS/JRS/ALAT radiological criteria for UIP compared to those of 2011. The inter-rater variability for categorizing the HRCT patterns is moderate for both classification systems, independent of experience in HRCT interpretation. The major advantage of the current guidelines is the better subdivision in the categories with a lower diagnostic certainty for UIP.

ADVANCES IN KNOWLEDGE

  • In 2018, a revision of the 2011 ATS/ERS/JRS/ALAT radiological criteria for UIP was published, part of diagnostic guidelines for idiopathic pulmonary fibrosis.- The inter-rater agreement among radiologist is moderate for both classification systems, without a significantly higher degree of agreement when applying the revised radiological criteria.
摘要

目的

确定修订后的 2018 年 ATS/ERS/JRS/ALAT 特发性肺纤维化(UIP)放射学标准与 2011 年指南相比是否提供了更好的诊断一致性。

方法

本横断面研究的队列(单中心、非学术性)于 2010 年 7 月至 2018 年 11 月从多学科团队讨论(MDD)中招募,临床怀疑存在纤维性间质性肺病(=325)。排除标准为 HRCT 技术问题、已知结缔组织疾病(类风湿关节炎、系统性硬化症、多发性肌炎或皮肌炎)、暴露于肺毒素或 MDD 后缺乏工作诊断。根据之前和当前的 ATS/ERS/JRS/ALAT 放射学标准,四位具有不同程度 HRCT 解释能力的读者独立对 192 次 HRCT 进行分类。进行了观察者间变异分析(Gwet 的二阶一致性系数,AC2)。

结果

2011 年和 2018 年 ATS/ERS/JRS/ALAT 放射学标准的 Gwet 得出的 AC2 分别为 0.62(±0.05)和 0.65(±0.05)。我们仅报告了读者之间在一致性水平上的微小差异。根据 2011 年指南的分布情况如下:57.3%“UIP 模式”,24%“可能的 UIP 模式”,18.8%“与 UIP 模式不一致”,根据 2018 年指南:59.6%“UIP”,14.5%“可能的 UIP”,15.9%“UIP 不确定”和 10%“其他诊断”。

结论

与 2011 年相比,应用修订后的 2018 年 ATS/ERS/JRS/ALAT UIP 放射学标准并未观察到统计学上更高程度的诊断一致性。两种分类系统的 HRCT 模式分类的观察者间变异性均为中度,与 HRCT 解释经验无关。当前指南的主要优势在于对于 UIP 的诊断确定性较低的类别进行了更好的细分。

知识进展

  • 2018 年,发布了 2011 年 ATS/ERS/JRS/ALAT UIP 放射学标准的修订版,作为特发性肺纤维化诊断指南的一部分。- 两种分类系统的放射科医生之间的观察者间一致性为中度,应用修订后的放射学标准并未显著提高一致性程度。

相似文献

10
Interobserver variability in high-resolution CT of the lungs.肺部高分辨率CT的观察者间变异性。
Eur J Radiol Open. 2020 Mar 31;7:100228. doi: 10.1016/j.ejro.2020.100228. eCollection 2020.

本文引用的文献

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