Naik K S, Spencer J A, Craven C M, MacLennan K A, Robinson P J
Department of Clinical Radiology, St James's University Hospital, Leeds, UK.
Clin Radiol. 1998 Jul;53(7):523-7. doi: 10.1016/s0009-9260(98)80174-8.
To compare two computed tomography (CT) techniques, contiguous 10 mm and alternate 10 mm slices of the chest, abdomen and pelvis, for initial staging of lymphoma.
Fifty-two consecutive patients referred at initial diagnosis for lymphoma staging by CT were examined with contiguous 10 mm slices of the chest, abdomen and pelvis. Oral contrast was administered, but no intravenous contrast. Two sets of films for each examination were printed, one with 10 mm contiguous slices and one with 10 mm alternate slices. The two sets of films for each patient were reviewed separately in a randomized order and blinded fashion by two independent observers. Discrepancies were reviewed by a third observer and subsequently resolved by consensus.
Staging assessments by both techniques were concordant in 51 of 52 cases: one patient was recorded as stage II on the alternate slice technique, but stage III with contiguous slices but this difference did not affect management. Inter-technique agreement was very good (kappa=0.97). The staging assessments showed discrepancies between the two observers in 12 of the 52 cases which were independent of technique (kappa=0.71; good agreement). Consensus review showed them to result from differences in perception in seven cases and differences in interpretation of abnormalities in five cases.
Our findings support the use of an alternate 10 mm slice technique in the staging of lymphoma at initial diagnosis. Observer variation was greater than the difference between techniques.
比较两种计算机断层扫描(CT)技术,即胸部、腹部和骨盆的连续10毫米层厚扫描与间隔10毫米层厚扫描,用于淋巴瘤的初始分期。
对52例初诊时因淋巴瘤分期而接受CT检查的连续患者进行胸部、腹部和骨盆的连续10毫米层厚扫描。口服对比剂,但未使用静脉对比剂。每次检查打印两套胶片,一套为10毫米连续层厚的,另一套为10毫米间隔层厚的。由两名独立观察者以随机顺序和盲法分别对每位患者的两套胶片进行阅片。差异由第三位观察者复查,随后通过达成共识来解决。
两种技术的分期评估在52例中有51例一致:1例患者在间隔层厚技术下记录为II期,但在连续层厚技术下为III期,但这种差异不影响治疗。技术间一致性非常好(kappa = 0.97)。在52例病例中,有12例的分期评估在两名观察者之间存在差异,且与技术无关(kappa = 0.71;一致性良好)。共识复查显示,7例是由于认知差异导致,5例是由于对异常的解读差异导致。
我们的研究结果支持在淋巴瘤初始诊断分期中使用间隔10毫米层厚技术。观察者间的差异大于技术间的差异。