BACKGROUND AND PURPOSE: Atherosclerosis of the major intracranial arteries is an important cause of ischemic stroke. We established measurement criteria to assess percent stenosis of a major intracranial artery (carotid, middle cerebral, vertebral, basilar) and determined the interobserver/intraobserver agreements and interclass/intraclass correlations of these measurements. METHODS: We defined percent stenosis of an intracranial artery as follows: percent stenosis = [(1 - (D(stenosis)/D(normal)))] x 100, where D(stenosis) = the diameter of the artery at the site of the most severe stenosis and D(normal) = the diameter of the proximal normal artery. If the proximal segment was diseased, contingency sites were chosen to measure D(normal): distal artery (second choice), feeding artery (third choice). Using a hand-held digital caliper, three neuroradiologists independently measured D(stenosis) and D(normal) of 24 stenotic intracranial arteries. Each observer repeated the readings 4 weeks later. We determined how frequently two observers' measurements of percent stenosis of each of the 24 diseased arteries differed by 10% or less. RESULTS: Among the three pairs of observers, interobserver agreements were 88% (observer 1 versus observer 2), 79% (observer 1 versus observer 3), 75% (observer 2 versus observer 3) for the first reading and were 75% (observer 1 versus observer 2), 100% (observer 1 versus observer 3), and 71% (observer 2 versus observer 3) for the second reading. Intraobserver agreement for each of the observers was 88%, 83%, and 100%. Interclass correlation was 85% (first reading) and 87% (second reading). Intraclass correlation was 92% (first and second readings combined). CONCLUSION: This method shows good interobserver and intraobserver agreements for the measurement of intracranial stenosis of a major artery. If validated in subsequent studies, this method may serve as a standard for the measurement of percent stenosis of an intracranial artery.
BACKGROUND AND PURPOSE:Atherosclerosis of the major intracranial arteries is an important cause of ischemic stroke. We established measurement criteria to assess percent stenosis of a major intracranial artery (carotid, middle cerebral, vertebral, basilar) and determined the interobserver/intraobserver agreements and interclass/intraclass correlations of these measurements. METHODS: We defined percent stenosis of an intracranial artery as follows: percent stenosis = [(1 - (D(stenosis)/D(normal)))] x 100, where D(stenosis) = the diameter of the artery at the site of the most severe stenosis and D(normal) = the diameter of the proximal normal artery. If the proximal segment was diseased, contingency sites were chosen to measure D(normal): distal artery (second choice), feeding artery (third choice). Using a hand-held digital caliper, three neuroradiologists independently measured D(stenosis) and D(normal) of 24 stenotic intracranial arteries. Each observer repeated the readings 4 weeks later. We determined how frequently two observers' measurements of percent stenosis of each of the 24 diseased arteries differed by 10% or less. RESULTS: Among the three pairs of observers, interobserver agreements were 88% (observer 1 versus observer 2), 79% (observer 1 versus observer 3), 75% (observer 2 versus observer 3) for the first reading and were 75% (observer 1 versus observer 2), 100% (observer 1 versus observer 3), and 71% (observer 2 versus observer 3) for the second reading. Intraobserver agreement for each of the observers was 88%, 83%, and 100%. Interclass correlation was 85% (first reading) and 87% (second reading). Intraclass correlation was 92% (first and second readings combined). CONCLUSION: This method shows good interobserver and intraobserver agreements for the measurement of intracranial stenosis of a major artery. If validated in subsequent studies, this method may serve as a standard for the measurement of percent stenosis of an intracranial artery.
Authors: M I Chimowitz; J Kokkinos; J Strong; M B Brown; S R Levine; S Silliman; M S Pessin; E Weichel; C A Sila; A J Furlan Journal: Neurology Date: 1995-08 Impact factor: 9.910
Authors: H J M Barnett; D W Taylor; R B Haynes; D L Sackett; S J Peerless; G G Ferguson; A J Fox; R N Rankin; V C Hachinski; D O Wiebers; M Eliasziw Journal: N Engl J Med Date: 1991-08-15 Impact factor: 91.245
Authors: Daniel F Arteaga; Megan K Strother; Carlos C Faraco; L Taylor Davis; Allison O Scott; Manus J Donahue Journal: J Magn Reson Imaging Date: 2019-04-02 Impact factor: 4.813
Authors: H Baradaran; P Patel; G Gialdini; A Giambrone; M P Lerario; B B Navi; J K Min; C Iadecola; H Kamel; A Gupta Journal: AJNR Am J Neuroradiol Date: 2017-07-20 Impact factor: 3.825
Authors: J Scott McNally; Peter J Hinckley; Akihiko Sakata; Laura B Eisenmenger; Seong-Eun Kim; Adam H De Havenon; Edward P Quigley; Eli Iacob; Gerald S Treiman; Dennis L Parker Journal: Stroke Date: 2018-10 Impact factor: 7.914
Authors: K Imai; T Mori; H Izumoto; T Kunieda; N Takabatake; S Yamamoto; M Watanabe Journal: AJNR Am J Neuroradiol Date: 2008-01-17 Impact factor: 3.825