Literature DB >> 22184495

Inter-rater reliability between musculoskeletal radiologists and orthopedic surgeons on computed tomography imaging features of spinal metastases.

L Khan1, G Mitera, L Probyn, M Ford, M Christakis, J Finkelstein, A Donovan, L Zhang, L Zeng, J Rubenstein, A Yee, L Holden, E Chow.   

Abstract

INTRODUCTION: The primary objective of this pilot study was to examine the inter-rater reliability in scoring the computed tomography (ct) imaging features of spinal metastases in patients referred for radiotherapy (rt) for bone pain.
METHODS: In a retrospective review, 3 musculoskeletal radiologists and 2 orthopedic spinal surgeons independently evaluated ct imaging features for 41 patients with spinal metastases treated with rt in an outpatient radiation clinic from January 2007 to October 2008. The evaluation used spinal assessment criteria that had been developed in-house, with reference to osseous and soft tissue tumour extent,presence of a pathologic fracture,severity of vertebral height loss, andpresence of kyphosis.The Cohen kappa coefficient between the two specialties was calculated.
RESULTS: Mean patient age was 69.2 years (30 men, 11 women). The mean total daily oral morphine equivalent was 73.4 mg. Treatment dose-fractionation schedules included 8 Gy/1 (n = 28), 20 Gy/5 (n = 12), and 20 Gy/8 (n = 1). Areas of moderate agreement in identifying the ct imaging appearance of spinal metastasis included extent of vertebral body involvement (κ = 0.48) and soft-tissue component (κ = 0.59). Areas of fair agreement included extent of pedicle involvement (κ = 0.28), extent of lamina involvement (κ = 0.35), and presence of pathologic fracture (κ = 0.20). Areas of poor agreement included nerve-root compression (κ = 0.14) and vertebral body height loss (κ = 0.19).
CONCLUSIONS: The range of agreement between musculoskeletal radiologists and orthopedic surgeons for most spinal assessment criteria is moderate to poor. A consensus for managing challenging vertebral injuries secondary to spinal metastases needs to be established so as to best triage patients to the most appropriate therapeutic modality.

Entities:  

Keywords:  Computed tomography; inter-rater reliability; metastases; spine

Year:  2011        PMID: 22184495      PMCID: PMC3224036          DOI: 10.3747/co.v18i6.797

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Curr Oncol        ISSN: 1198-0052            Impact factor:   3.677


  15 in total

Review 1.  The impact of gross tumor volume (GTV) and clinical target volume (CTV) definition on the total accuracy in radiotherapy theoretical aspects and practical experiences.

Authors:  Elisabeth Weiss; Clemens F Hess
Journal:  Strahlenther Onkol       Date:  2003-01       Impact factor: 3.621

2.  Quantitative characterization of metastatic disease in the spine. Part I. Semiautomated segmentation using atlas-based deformable registration and the level set method.

Authors:  M Hardisty; L Gordon; P Agarwal; T Skrinskas; C Whyne
Journal:  Med Phys       Date:  2007-08       Impact factor: 4.071

3.  Lumbar spine: reliability of MR imaging findings.

Authors:  John A Carrino; Jon D Lurie; Anna N A Tosteson; Tor D Tosteson; Eugene J Carragee; Jay Kaiser; Margaret R Grove; Emily Blood; Loretta H Pearson; James N Weinstein; Richard Herzog
Journal:  Radiology       Date:  2008-10-27       Impact factor: 11.105

Review 4.  Incidence, prevalence and distribution of bone metastases.

Authors:  M Tubiana-Hulin
Journal:  Bone       Date:  1991       Impact factor: 4.398

5.  Quantitative characterization of metastatic disease in the spine. Part II. Histogram-based analyses.

Authors:  Carl Whyne; Michael Hardisty; Florence Wu; Tomas Skrinskas; Mark Clemons; Lyle Gordon; Parminder S Basran
Journal:  Med Phys       Date:  2007-08       Impact factor: 4.071

6.  Percutaneous vertebroplasty and kyphoplasty for painful vertebral body fractures in cancer patients.

Authors:  Daryl R Fourney; Donald F Schomer; Remi Nader; Jennifer Chlan-Fourney; Dima Suki; Kamran Ahrar; Laurence D Rhines; Ziya L Gokaslan
Journal:  J Neurosurg       Date:  2003-01       Impact factor: 5.115

7.  Transthoracic vertebrectomy for metastatic spinal tumors.

Authors:  Z L Gokaslan; J E York; G L Walsh; I E McCutcheon; F F Lang; J B Putnam; D M Wildrick; S G Swisher; D Abi-Said; R Sawaya
Journal:  J Neurosurg       Date:  1998-10       Impact factor: 5.115

8.  Successful salvage using percutaneous vertebroplasty in cancer patients with painful spinal metastases or osteoporotic compression fractures.

Authors:  Edward Chow; Lori Holden; Cyril Danjoux; Albert Yee; Marjan Vidmar; Ruth Connolly; Joel Finkelstein; Gordon Cheung
Journal:  Radiother Oncol       Date:  2004-03       Impact factor: 6.280

9.  Qualitative and quantitative assessment of degeneration of cervical intervertebral discs and facet joints.

Authors:  Joris Walraevens; Baoge Liu; Joke Meersschaert; Philippe Demaerel; Hans Delye; Bart Depreitere; Jos Vander Sloten; Jan Goffin
Journal:  Eur Spine J       Date:  2008-11-13       Impact factor: 3.134

10.  Volume definition in radiotherapy planning for lung cancer: how the radiologist can help.

Authors:  A E F Roy; P Wells
Journal:  Cancer Imaging       Date:  2006-09-07       Impact factor: 3.909

View more
  2 in total

1.  Radiographic union score for hip substantially improves agreement between surgeons and radiologists.

Authors:  Mohit Bhandari; Mary M Chiavaras; Naveen Parasu; Hema Choudur; Olufemi Ayeni; Rajesh Chakravertty; Simrit Bains; Alisha Hak; Sheila Sprague; Brad Petrisor
Journal:  BMC Musculoskelet Disord       Date:  2013-02-25       Impact factor: 2.362

Review 2.  Bridging the "last mile" gap between AI implementation and operation: "data awareness" that matters.

Authors:  Federico Cabitza; Andrea Campagner; Clara Balsano
Journal:  Ann Transl Med       Date:  2020-04
  2 in total

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.