...
首页> 外文期刊>European Journal of Radiology >Accuracy and interobserver agreement between MR-non-expert radiologists and MR-experts in reading MRI for suspected appendicitis
【24h】

Accuracy and interobserver agreement between MR-non-expert radiologists and MR-experts in reading MRI for suspected appendicitis

机译:非MR放射线专家和MR专家在MRI诊断可疑阑尾炎中的准确性和观察者之间的一致性

获取原文
获取原文并翻译 | 示例

摘要

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.
机译:目的比较在怀疑腹部阑尾炎患者中进行腹部MRI评估的经验有限的放射线医师(非专家)与具有较长MR阅读经验的放射线医师(专家)的准确性和观察者之间的一致性。方法在223名成年的疑似阑尾炎患者中进行MR成像,并由八名MR经验不足的放射科医生组成的团队中的两名成员进行独立阅读,他们在研究前接受了100 MR检查(非专业阅读)。一致的是,两名具有较大腹部MR经验(> 500次检查)的放射科医生进行了专家阅读。三个月后根据所有可用信息(MRI表现除外)进行最终诊断。我们分别估计了阑尾炎和所有紧急诊断的MRI敏感性和特异性。使用kappa统计数据评估了观察者之间的协议。结果223例患者中有147例被紧急诊断。 117例有阑尾炎。 MR非专家放射科医生对阑尾炎的敏感性为0.89,而MR专家读数为0.97(p = 0.01)。非MR专家的特异性为0.83,而MR专家阅读的特异性为0.93(p = 0.002)。 MR专家和MR非专家在89%的病例中同意阑尾炎(kappa 0.78)。与非MR专家阅读相比,非MR专家检测紧急诊断的准确性显着降低:灵敏度分别为0.84对0.95(p <0.001)和特异性0.71对0.82(p = 0.03)。紧急诊断的同意率为83%(kappa 0.63)。结论MR-非专家对疑似阑尾炎患者的MRI读值具有足够的敏感性,与MR-expert读值吻合较好,但MR-expert读值准确性较高。

著录项

相似文献

  • 外文文献
  • 中文文献
  • 专利
获取原文

客服邮箱:kefu@zhangqiaokeyan.com

京公网安备:11010802029741号 ICP备案号:京ICP备15016152号-6 六维联合信息科技 (北京) 有限公司©版权所有
  • 客服微信

  • 服务号