Accuracy and interobserver agreement between MR-non-expert radiologists and MR-experts in reading MRI for suspected appendicitis
Abstract Objective To compare accuracy and interobserver agreement between radiologists with limited experience in the evaluation of abdominal MRI (non-experts), and radiologists with longer MR reading experience (experts), in reading MRI in patients with suspected appendicitis. Methods MR imaging w...
Gespeichert in:
Veröffentlicht in: | European journal of radiology 2014-01, Vol.83 (1), p.103-110 |
---|---|
Hauptverfasser: | , , , , , , , , , |
Format: | Artikel |
Sprache: | eng |
Schlagworte: | |
Online-Zugang: | Volltext |
Tags: |
Tag hinzufügen
Keine Tags, Fügen Sie den ersten Tag hinzu!
|
container_end_page | 110 |
---|---|
container_issue | 1 |
container_start_page | 103 |
container_title | European journal of radiology |
container_volume | 83 |
creator | Leeuwenburgh, Marjolein M.N Wiarda, Bart M Jensch, Sebastiaan van Es, H. Wouter Stockmann, Hein B.A.C Gratama, Jan Willem C Cobben, Lodewijk P.J Bossuyt, Patrick M.M Boermeester, Marja A Stoker, Jaap |
description | Abstract Objective To compare accuracy and interobserver agreement between radiologists with limited experience in the evaluation of abdominal MRI (non-experts), and radiologists with longer MR reading experience (experts), in reading MRI in patients with suspected appendicitis. Methods MR imaging was performed in 223 adult patients with suspected appendicitis and read independently by two members of a team of eight MR-inexperienced radiologists, who were trained with 100 MR examinations previous to this study (non-expert reading). Expert reading was performed by two radiologists with a larger abdominal MR experience (>500 examinations) in consensus. A final diagnosis was assigned after three months based on all available information, except MRI findings. We estimated MRI sensitivity and specificity for appendicitis and for all urgent diagnoses separately. Interobserver agreement was evaluated using kappa statistics. Results Urgent diagnoses were assigned to 147 of 223 patients; 117 had appendicitis. Sensitivity for appendicitis was 0.89 by MR-non-expert radiologists and 0.97 in MR-expert reading ( p = 0.01). Specificity was 0.83 for MR-non-experts versus 0.93 for MR-expert reading ( p = 0.002). MR-experts and MR-non-experts agreed on appendicitis in 89% of cases (kappa 0.78). Accuracy in detecting urgent diagnoses was significantly lower in MR-non-experts compared to MR-expert reading: sensitivity 0.84 versus 0.95 ( p < 0.001) and specificity 0.71 versus 0.82 ( p = 0.03), respectively. Agreement on urgent diagnoses was 83% (kappa 0.63). Conclusion MR-non-experts have sufficient sensitivity in reading MRI in patients with suspected appendicitis, with good agreement with MR-expert reading, but accuracy of MR-expert reading was higher. |
doi_str_mv | 10.1016/j.ejrad.2013.09.022 |
format | Article |
fullrecord | <record><control><sourceid>proquest_cross</sourceid><recordid>TN_cdi_proquest_miscellaneous_1490723435</recordid><sourceformat>XML</sourceformat><sourcesystem>PC</sourcesystem><els_id>1_s2_0_S0720048X13005214</els_id><sourcerecordid>1490723435</sourcerecordid><originalsourceid>FETCH-LOGICAL-c459t-c8475ec046d02d3fc751af703639cded5ffa735f408c7927d4aa4c3270feff9b3</originalsourceid><addsrcrecordid>eNqFkUuLFDEUhYMoTjv6CwTJ0k2VeVWlaqEwDD4GRgQf4C6kk5smZXVSJqnR3vnTTU-PLty4CuSccy_3Owg9paSlhPYvphampG3LCOUtGVvC2D20oYNkjZRM3kcbIhlpiBi-nqFHOU-EkE6M7CE6Y4L2w8j6Dfp1YcyatDlgHSz2oUCK2wzpBhLWuwSwh1DwFsoPgIDff2xCDA38XCAVXJf7OMedzyXfxqt8knKdhBNUPezq7xV2MeG85gVMAYv1skCw3vji82P0wOk5w5O79xx9efP68-W75vrD26vLi-vGiG4sjRmE7MAQ0VvCLHdGdlQ7SXjPR2PBds5pyTsnyGDkyKQVWgvDmSQOnBu3_Bw9P81dUvy-Qi5q77OBedYB4poVFWPFxQXvqpWfrCbFnBM4tSS_1-mgKFFH9GpSt-jVEb0io6roa-rZ3YJ1uwf7N_OHdTW8PBmgnnnjIalsPAQD1qfKRdno_7Pg1T95M_vgjZ6_wQHyFNcUKkFFVWaKqE_H9o_lU157Z1Tw3xjcrXk</addsrcrecordid><sourcetype>Aggregation Database</sourcetype><iscdi>true</iscdi><recordtype>article</recordtype><pqid>1490723435</pqid></control><display><type>article</type><title>Accuracy and interobserver agreement between MR-non-expert radiologists and MR-experts in reading MRI for suspected appendicitis</title><source>MEDLINE</source><source>Elsevier ScienceDirect Journals</source><creator>Leeuwenburgh, Marjolein M.N ; Wiarda, Bart M ; Jensch, Sebastiaan ; van Es, H. Wouter ; Stockmann, Hein B.A.C ; Gratama, Jan Willem C ; Cobben, Lodewijk P.J ; Bossuyt, Patrick M.M ; Boermeester, Marja A ; Stoker, Jaap</creator><creatorcontrib>Leeuwenburgh, Marjolein M.N ; Wiarda, Bart M ; Jensch, Sebastiaan ; van Es, H. Wouter ; Stockmann, Hein B.A.C ; Gratama, Jan Willem C ; Cobben, Lodewijk P.J ; Bossuyt, Patrick M.M ; Boermeester, Marja A ; Stoker, Jaap ; on behalf of the OPTIMAP Study group ; OPTIMAP Study group</creatorcontrib><description>Abstract Objective To compare accuracy and interobserver agreement between radiologists with limited experience in the evaluation of abdominal MRI (non-experts), and radiologists with longer MR reading experience (experts), in reading MRI in patients with suspected appendicitis. Methods MR imaging was performed in 223 adult patients with suspected appendicitis and read independently by two members of a team of eight MR-inexperienced radiologists, who were trained with 100 MR examinations previous to this study (non-expert reading). Expert reading was performed by two radiologists with a larger abdominal MR experience (>500 examinations) in consensus. A final diagnosis was assigned after three months based on all available information, except MRI findings. We estimated MRI sensitivity and specificity for appendicitis and for all urgent diagnoses separately. Interobserver agreement was evaluated using kappa statistics. Results Urgent diagnoses were assigned to 147 of 223 patients; 117 had appendicitis. Sensitivity for appendicitis was 0.89 by MR-non-expert radiologists and 0.97 in MR-expert reading ( p = 0.01). Specificity was 0.83 for MR-non-experts versus 0.93 for MR-expert reading ( p = 0.002). MR-experts and MR-non-experts agreed on appendicitis in 89% of cases (kappa 0.78). Accuracy in detecting urgent diagnoses was significantly lower in MR-non-experts compared to MR-expert reading: sensitivity 0.84 versus 0.95 ( p < 0.001) and specificity 0.71 versus 0.82 ( p = 0.03), respectively. Agreement on urgent diagnoses was 83% (kappa 0.63). Conclusion MR-non-experts have sufficient sensitivity in reading MRI in patients with suspected appendicitis, with good agreement with MR-expert reading, but accuracy of MR-expert reading was higher.</description><identifier>ISSN: 0720-048X</identifier><identifier>EISSN: 1872-7727</identifier><identifier>DOI: 10.1016/j.ejrad.2013.09.022</identifier><identifier>PMID: 24168926</identifier><language>eng</language><publisher>Ireland: Elsevier Ireland Ltd</publisher><subject>Abdomen, Acute - diagnosis ; Abdominal pain ; Adult ; Appendicitis - diagnosis ; Clinical Competence - statistics & numerical data ; Female ; Humans ; Magnetic Resonance Imaging - statistics & numerical data ; Magnetic resonance imaging appendicitis observer variation sensitivity and specificity ; Male ; Middle Aged ; Netherlands ; Observer Variation ; Radiography, Abdominal - statistics & numerical data ; Radiology ; Reproducibility of Results ; Sensitivity and Specificity</subject><ispartof>European journal of radiology, 2014-01, Vol.83 (1), p.103-110</ispartof><rights>Elsevier Ireland Ltd</rights><rights>2013 Elsevier Ireland Ltd</rights><rights>Copyright © 2013 Elsevier Ireland Ltd. All rights reserved.</rights><lds50>peer_reviewed</lds50><oa>free_for_read</oa><woscitedreferencessubscribed>false</woscitedreferencessubscribed><citedby>FETCH-LOGICAL-c459t-c8475ec046d02d3fc751af703639cded5ffa735f408c7927d4aa4c3270feff9b3</citedby><cites>FETCH-LOGICAL-c459t-c8475ec046d02d3fc751af703639cded5ffa735f408c7927d4aa4c3270feff9b3</cites></display><links><openurl>$$Topenurl_article</openurl><openurlfulltext>$$Topenurlfull_article</openurlfulltext><thumbnail>$$Tsyndetics_thumb_exl</thumbnail><linktohtml>$$Uhttps://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.ejrad.2013.09.022$$EHTML$$P50$$Gelsevier$$Hfree_for_read</linktohtml><link.rule.ids>314,777,781,3537,27905,27906,45976</link.rule.ids><backlink>$$Uhttps://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/24168926$$D View this record in MEDLINE/PubMed$$Hfree_for_read</backlink></links><search><creatorcontrib>Leeuwenburgh, Marjolein M.N</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Wiarda, Bart M</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Jensch, Sebastiaan</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>van Es, H. Wouter</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Stockmann, Hein B.A.C</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Gratama, Jan Willem C</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Cobben, Lodewijk P.J</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Bossuyt, Patrick M.M</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Boermeester, Marja A</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Stoker, Jaap</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>on behalf of the OPTIMAP Study group</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>OPTIMAP Study group</creatorcontrib><title>Accuracy and interobserver agreement between MR-non-expert radiologists and MR-experts in reading MRI for suspected appendicitis</title><title>European journal of radiology</title><addtitle>Eur J Radiol</addtitle><description>Abstract Objective To compare accuracy and interobserver agreement between radiologists with limited experience in the evaluation of abdominal MRI (non-experts), and radiologists with longer MR reading experience (experts), in reading MRI in patients with suspected appendicitis. Methods MR imaging was performed in 223 adult patients with suspected appendicitis and read independently by two members of a team of eight MR-inexperienced radiologists, who were trained with 100 MR examinations previous to this study (non-expert reading). Expert reading was performed by two radiologists with a larger abdominal MR experience (>500 examinations) in consensus. A final diagnosis was assigned after three months based on all available information, except MRI findings. We estimated MRI sensitivity and specificity for appendicitis and for all urgent diagnoses separately. Interobserver agreement was evaluated using kappa statistics. Results Urgent diagnoses were assigned to 147 of 223 patients; 117 had appendicitis. Sensitivity for appendicitis was 0.89 by MR-non-expert radiologists and 0.97 in MR-expert reading ( p = 0.01). Specificity was 0.83 for MR-non-experts versus 0.93 for MR-expert reading ( p = 0.002). MR-experts and MR-non-experts agreed on appendicitis in 89% of cases (kappa 0.78). Accuracy in detecting urgent diagnoses was significantly lower in MR-non-experts compared to MR-expert reading: sensitivity 0.84 versus 0.95 ( p < 0.001) and specificity 0.71 versus 0.82 ( p = 0.03), respectively. Agreement on urgent diagnoses was 83% (kappa 0.63). Conclusion MR-non-experts have sufficient sensitivity in reading MRI in patients with suspected appendicitis, with good agreement with MR-expert reading, but accuracy of MR-expert reading was higher.</description><subject>Abdomen, Acute - diagnosis</subject><subject>Abdominal pain</subject><subject>Adult</subject><subject>Appendicitis - diagnosis</subject><subject>Clinical Competence - statistics & numerical data</subject><subject>Female</subject><subject>Humans</subject><subject>Magnetic Resonance Imaging - statistics & numerical data</subject><subject>Magnetic resonance imaging appendicitis observer variation sensitivity and specificity</subject><subject>Male</subject><subject>Middle Aged</subject><subject>Netherlands</subject><subject>Observer Variation</subject><subject>Radiography, Abdominal - statistics & numerical data</subject><subject>Radiology</subject><subject>Reproducibility of Results</subject><subject>Sensitivity and Specificity</subject><issn>0720-048X</issn><issn>1872-7727</issn><fulltext>true</fulltext><rsrctype>article</rsrctype><creationdate>2014</creationdate><recordtype>article</recordtype><sourceid>EIF</sourceid><recordid>eNqFkUuLFDEUhYMoTjv6CwTJ0k2VeVWlaqEwDD4GRgQf4C6kk5smZXVSJqnR3vnTTU-PLty4CuSccy_3Owg9paSlhPYvphampG3LCOUtGVvC2D20oYNkjZRM3kcbIhlpiBi-nqFHOU-EkE6M7CE6Y4L2w8j6Dfp1YcyatDlgHSz2oUCK2wzpBhLWuwSwh1DwFsoPgIDff2xCDA38XCAVXJf7OMedzyXfxqt8knKdhBNUPezq7xV2MeG85gVMAYv1skCw3vji82P0wOk5w5O79xx9efP68-W75vrD26vLi-vGiG4sjRmE7MAQ0VvCLHdGdlQ7SXjPR2PBds5pyTsnyGDkyKQVWgvDmSQOnBu3_Bw9P81dUvy-Qi5q77OBedYB4poVFWPFxQXvqpWfrCbFnBM4tSS_1-mgKFFH9GpSt-jVEb0io6roa-rZ3YJ1uwf7N_OHdTW8PBmgnnnjIalsPAQD1qfKRdno_7Pg1T95M_vgjZ6_wQHyFNcUKkFFVWaKqE_H9o_lU157Z1Tw3xjcrXk</recordid><startdate>20140101</startdate><enddate>20140101</enddate><creator>Leeuwenburgh, Marjolein M.N</creator><creator>Wiarda, Bart M</creator><creator>Jensch, Sebastiaan</creator><creator>van Es, H. Wouter</creator><creator>Stockmann, Hein B.A.C</creator><creator>Gratama, Jan Willem C</creator><creator>Cobben, Lodewijk P.J</creator><creator>Bossuyt, Patrick M.M</creator><creator>Boermeester, Marja A</creator><creator>Stoker, Jaap</creator><general>Elsevier Ireland Ltd</general><scope>6I.</scope><scope>AAFTH</scope><scope>CGR</scope><scope>CUY</scope><scope>CVF</scope><scope>ECM</scope><scope>EIF</scope><scope>NPM</scope><scope>AAYXX</scope><scope>CITATION</scope><scope>7X8</scope></search><sort><creationdate>20140101</creationdate><title>Accuracy and interobserver agreement between MR-non-expert radiologists and MR-experts in reading MRI for suspected appendicitis</title><author>Leeuwenburgh, Marjolein M.N ; Wiarda, Bart M ; Jensch, Sebastiaan ; van Es, H. Wouter ; Stockmann, Hein B.A.C ; Gratama, Jan Willem C ; Cobben, Lodewijk P.J ; Bossuyt, Patrick M.M ; Boermeester, Marja A ; Stoker, Jaap</author></sort><facets><frbrtype>5</frbrtype><frbrgroupid>cdi_FETCH-LOGICAL-c459t-c8475ec046d02d3fc751af703639cded5ffa735f408c7927d4aa4c3270feff9b3</frbrgroupid><rsrctype>articles</rsrctype><prefilter>articles</prefilter><language>eng</language><creationdate>2014</creationdate><topic>Abdomen, Acute - diagnosis</topic><topic>Abdominal pain</topic><topic>Adult</topic><topic>Appendicitis - diagnosis</topic><topic>Clinical Competence - statistics & numerical data</topic><topic>Female</topic><topic>Humans</topic><topic>Magnetic Resonance Imaging - statistics & numerical data</topic><topic>Magnetic resonance imaging appendicitis observer variation sensitivity and specificity</topic><topic>Male</topic><topic>Middle Aged</topic><topic>Netherlands</topic><topic>Observer Variation</topic><topic>Radiography, Abdominal - statistics & numerical data</topic><topic>Radiology</topic><topic>Reproducibility of Results</topic><topic>Sensitivity and Specificity</topic><toplevel>peer_reviewed</toplevel><toplevel>online_resources</toplevel><creatorcontrib>Leeuwenburgh, Marjolein M.N</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Wiarda, Bart M</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Jensch, Sebastiaan</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>van Es, H. Wouter</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Stockmann, Hein B.A.C</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Gratama, Jan Willem C</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Cobben, Lodewijk P.J</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Bossuyt, Patrick M.M</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Boermeester, Marja A</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Stoker, Jaap</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>on behalf of the OPTIMAP Study group</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>OPTIMAP Study group</creatorcontrib><collection>ScienceDirect Open Access Titles</collection><collection>Elsevier:ScienceDirect:Open Access</collection><collection>Medline</collection><collection>MEDLINE</collection><collection>MEDLINE (Ovid)</collection><collection>MEDLINE</collection><collection>MEDLINE</collection><collection>PubMed</collection><collection>CrossRef</collection><collection>MEDLINE - Academic</collection><jtitle>European journal of radiology</jtitle></facets><delivery><delcategory>Remote Search Resource</delcategory><fulltext>fulltext</fulltext></delivery><addata><au>Leeuwenburgh, Marjolein M.N</au><au>Wiarda, Bart M</au><au>Jensch, Sebastiaan</au><au>van Es, H. Wouter</au><au>Stockmann, Hein B.A.C</au><au>Gratama, Jan Willem C</au><au>Cobben, Lodewijk P.J</au><au>Bossuyt, Patrick M.M</au><au>Boermeester, Marja A</au><au>Stoker, Jaap</au><aucorp>on behalf of the OPTIMAP Study group</aucorp><aucorp>OPTIMAP Study group</aucorp><format>journal</format><genre>article</genre><ristype>JOUR</ristype><atitle>Accuracy and interobserver agreement between MR-non-expert radiologists and MR-experts in reading MRI for suspected appendicitis</atitle><jtitle>European journal of radiology</jtitle><addtitle>Eur J Radiol</addtitle><date>2014-01-01</date><risdate>2014</risdate><volume>83</volume><issue>1</issue><spage>103</spage><epage>110</epage><pages>103-110</pages><issn>0720-048X</issn><eissn>1872-7727</eissn><abstract>Abstract Objective To compare accuracy and interobserver agreement between radiologists with limited experience in the evaluation of abdominal MRI (non-experts), and radiologists with longer MR reading experience (experts), in reading MRI in patients with suspected appendicitis. Methods MR imaging was performed in 223 adult patients with suspected appendicitis and read independently by two members of a team of eight MR-inexperienced radiologists, who were trained with 100 MR examinations previous to this study (non-expert reading). Expert reading was performed by two radiologists with a larger abdominal MR experience (>500 examinations) in consensus. A final diagnosis was assigned after three months based on all available information, except MRI findings. We estimated MRI sensitivity and specificity for appendicitis and for all urgent diagnoses separately. Interobserver agreement was evaluated using kappa statistics. Results Urgent diagnoses were assigned to 147 of 223 patients; 117 had appendicitis. Sensitivity for appendicitis was 0.89 by MR-non-expert radiologists and 0.97 in MR-expert reading ( p = 0.01). Specificity was 0.83 for MR-non-experts versus 0.93 for MR-expert reading ( p = 0.002). MR-experts and MR-non-experts agreed on appendicitis in 89% of cases (kappa 0.78). Accuracy in detecting urgent diagnoses was significantly lower in MR-non-experts compared to MR-expert reading: sensitivity 0.84 versus 0.95 ( p < 0.001) and specificity 0.71 versus 0.82 ( p = 0.03), respectively. Agreement on urgent diagnoses was 83% (kappa 0.63). Conclusion MR-non-experts have sufficient sensitivity in reading MRI in patients with suspected appendicitis, with good agreement with MR-expert reading, but accuracy of MR-expert reading was higher.</abstract><cop>Ireland</cop><pub>Elsevier Ireland Ltd</pub><pmid>24168926</pmid><doi>10.1016/j.ejrad.2013.09.022</doi><tpages>8</tpages><oa>free_for_read</oa></addata></record> |
fulltext | fulltext |
identifier | ISSN: 0720-048X |
ispartof | European journal of radiology, 2014-01, Vol.83 (1), p.103-110 |
issn | 0720-048X 1872-7727 |
language | eng |
recordid | cdi_proquest_miscellaneous_1490723435 |
source | MEDLINE; Elsevier ScienceDirect Journals |
subjects | Abdomen, Acute - diagnosis Abdominal pain Adult Appendicitis - diagnosis Clinical Competence - statistics & numerical data Female Humans Magnetic Resonance Imaging - statistics & numerical data Magnetic resonance imaging appendicitis observer variation sensitivity and specificity Male Middle Aged Netherlands Observer Variation Radiography, Abdominal - statistics & numerical data Radiology Reproducibility of Results Sensitivity and Specificity |
title | Accuracy and interobserver agreement between MR-non-expert radiologists and MR-experts in reading MRI for suspected appendicitis |
url | https://sfx.bib-bvb.de/sfx_tum?ctx_ver=Z39.88-2004&ctx_enc=info:ofi/enc:UTF-8&ctx_tim=2025-01-19T22%3A54%3A12IST&url_ver=Z39.88-2004&url_ctx_fmt=infofi/fmt:kev:mtx:ctx&rfr_id=info:sid/primo.exlibrisgroup.com:primo3-Article-proquest_cross&rft_val_fmt=info:ofi/fmt:kev:mtx:journal&rft.genre=article&rft.atitle=Accuracy%20and%20interobserver%20agreement%20between%20MR-non-expert%20radiologists%20and%20MR-experts%20in%20reading%20MRI%20for%20suspected%20appendicitis&rft.jtitle=European%20journal%20of%20radiology&rft.au=Leeuwenburgh,%20Marjolein%20M.N&rft.aucorp=on%20behalf%20of%20the%20OPTIMAP%20Study%20group&rft.date=2014-01-01&rft.volume=83&rft.issue=1&rft.spage=103&rft.epage=110&rft.pages=103-110&rft.issn=0720-048X&rft.eissn=1872-7727&rft_id=info:doi/10.1016/j.ejrad.2013.09.022&rft_dat=%3Cproquest_cross%3E1490723435%3C/proquest_cross%3E%3Curl%3E%3C/url%3E&disable_directlink=true&sfx.directlink=off&sfx.report_link=0&rft_id=info:oai/&rft_pqid=1490723435&rft_id=info:pmid/24168926&rft_els_id=1_s2_0_S0720048X13005214&rfr_iscdi=true |