In:
Journal of NeuroInterventional Surgery, BMJ, Vol. 10, No. 5 ( 2018-05), p. 462-466
Abstract:
The angiographic evaluation of previously coiled aneurysms can be difficult yet remains critical for determining re-treatment. Objective The main objective of this study was to determine the inter-rater reliability for both the Raymond Scale and per cent embolization among a group of neurointerventionalists evaluating previously embolized aneurysms. Methods A panel of 15 neurointerventionalists examined 92 distinct cases of immediate post-coil embolization and 1 year post-embolization angiographs. Each case was presented four times throughout the study, along with alterations in demographics in order to evaluate intra-rater reliability. All respondents were asked to provide the per cent embolization (0–100%) and Raymond Scale grade (1-3) for each aneurysm. Inter-rater reliability was evaluated by computing weighted kappa values (for the Raymond Scale) and intraclass correlation coefficients (ICC) for per cent embolization. Results 10 neurosurgeons and 5 interventional neuroradiologists evaluated 368 simulated cases. The agreement among all readers employing the Raymond Scale was fair (κ=0.35) while concordance in per cent embolization was good (ICC=0.64). Clinicians with fewer than 10 years of experience demonstrated a significantly greater level of agreement than the group with greater than 10 years (κ=0.39 and ICC=0.70 vs κ=0.28 and ICC=0.58). When the same aneurysm was presented multiple times, clinicians demonstrated excellent consistency when assessing per cent embolization (ICC=0.82), but moderate agreement when employing the Raymond classification (κ=0.58). Conclusions Identifying the per cent embolization in previously coiled aneurysms resulted in good inter- and intra-rater agreement, regardless of years of experience. The strong agreement among providers employing per cent embolization may make it a valuable tool for embolization assessment in this patient population.
Type of Medium:
Online Resource
ISSN:
1759-8478
,
1759-8486
DOI:
10.1136/neurintsurg-2017-013231
Language:
English
Publisher:
BMJ
Publication Date:
2018
detail.hit.zdb_id:
2506028-4
Permalink