Comby Pierre-Olivier, Darsaut Tim E, Benomar Anass, Lecaros Nicolas, Alhazmi Hanan, Weill Alain, Iancu Daniela, Jabre Roland, Boisseau William, Benjamin Maier, Fahed Robert, Abdalkader Mohamad, Chow Michael M C, Stechishin Owen, Nguyen Thanh N, Thouant Pierre, Lemogne Brivael, Bernard Angélique, Chavent Adrien, Lebeaupin Francois, Baptiste Laura, Lenfant Marc, Zhu Francois, Baharvahdat Humain, Gambino Andrea, Shankar Jai J S, O'Kelly Cian J, Kaderali Zul, Darcourt Jean, Brunette-Clément Tristan, Olijnik Leonardo, Roy Daniel, Raymond Jean
Centre Hospitalier Universitaire Dijon Bourgogne, Dijon, France.
University of Alberta Hospital, Edmonton, Canada.
Neuroradiology. 2025 May 7. doi: 10.1007/s00234-025-03565-6.
Angiographic results are commonly used to evaluate and compare the treatment of aneurysms. We sought to determine and compare the reliability and clinical implications of a commonly used 3-point angiographic outcome scale for aneurysms treated with WEB or endovascular coils.
An electronic portfolio of 60 aneurysms (30 treated with WEB devices and 30 with coils) was evaluated by 32 raters of various training backgrounds, who were asked to grade angiographic results and provide management recommendations (delayed follow-up, close follow-up, or re-treatment). Twenty-five raters performed a second evaluation of permuted cases at least a month later. Agreement was analyzed with Gwet's AC2 (κ) reliability coefficients and the relationship between angiographic grade and management recommendation using Cramer's V.
Inter-rater agreement was substantial for occlusion grade (κ = 0.78; 95%CI: 0.74-0.82) and management decision (κ = 0.79; 95%CI: 0.74-0.84). Agreement was substantial and similar for angiographic results of WEB-treated (κ = 0.78; 95%CI: 0.79-0.85) and coiled aneurysms (κ = 0.79; 95%CI: 0.74-0.83). Inter-rater agreement on management decisions was substantial for both WEB-treated aneurysms (κ = 0.79; 95%CI: 0.73-0.85) and coiled aneurysms (κ = 0.79; 95%CI: 0.73-0.85). Mean intra-rater agreement was substantial or almost perfect. There was strong correlation between angiographic grade and management recommendation (mean Cramer's V = 0.77, SD: 0.12). The meaning of each category of the scale in terms of further management was the same, whether treatment was with WEB or coils.
A commonly used 3-point scale was shown to be a reliable tool to compare the results of aneurysms treated with WEB devices or endovascular coils.
血管造影结果常用于评估和比较动脉瘤的治疗效果。我们试图确定并比较一种常用的三点血管造影结果量表在经WEB或血管内栓塞治疗的动脉瘤中的可靠性及临床意义。
由32名具有不同培训背景的评估者对60个动脉瘤(30个用WEB装置治疗,30个用栓塞治疗)的电子病例组合进行评估,要求他们对血管造影结果进行分级并提供管理建议(延迟随访、密切随访或再次治疗)。25名评估者至少在一个月后对置换后的病例进行了第二次评估。使用Gwet's AC2(κ)可靠性系数分析一致性,并使用Cramer's V分析血管造影分级与管理建议之间的关系。
评估者间在闭塞分级(κ = 0.78;95%CI:0.74 - 0.82)和管理决策(κ = 0.79;95%CI:0.74 - 0.84)方面的一致性较高。WEB治疗组(κ = 0.78;95%CI:0.79 - 0.85)和栓塞治疗组动脉瘤(κ = 0.79;95%CI:0.74 - 0.83)的血管造影结果一致性较高且相似。评估者间在WEB治疗组动脉瘤(κ = 0.79;95%CI:0.73 - 0.85)和栓塞治疗组动脉瘤(κ = 0.79;95%CI:0.73 - 0.85)的管理决策方面的一致性较高。评估者内平均一致性较高或几乎完美。血管造影分级与管理建议之间存在强相关性(平均Cramer's V = 0.77,标准差:0.12)。无论治疗是使用WEB还是栓塞,量表各分类在进一步管理方面的意义相同。
一种常用的三点量表被证明是比较经WEB装置或血管内栓塞治疗的动脉瘤结果的可靠工具。