OBJECTIVE: Follow-up of pseudotumors observed with metal-artefact reducing sequence (MARS)-magnetic resonance imaging (MRI) following metal-on-metal total hip arthroplasty (MoMTHA) depends on how severe these pseudotumors are graded. Several pseudotumor grading systems for MARS-MRI have emerged but little is known of their validity. We studied the intra- and interobserver reliability of three different pseudotumor grading systems in a single cohort of MoMTHA. PATIENTS AND METHODS: Two experienced musculoskeletal radiologists independently used three different pseudotumor grading systems for classifying MARS-MRI results of the same cohort of 42 MoMTHA patients (49 hips, mean follow-up 5.2 years). Intraobserver and interobserver reliability for each grading system was measured using Cohen's kappa (κ). Variance in pseudotumor severity grading between systems was analyzed. RESULTS: Intraobserver reliability on grading pseudotumor severity with the Anderson, Matthies, and Hauptfleisch grading system scored 0.47, 0.10, and 0.35 (observer 1), and 0.75, 0.38, and 0.42 (observer 2), respectively. Interobserver reliability scores for pseudotumor severity were 0.58, 0.23, and 0.34, respectively. CONCLUSIONS: Intraobserver reliability for grading pseudotumor severity on MARS-MRI ranged from poor to good, dependent on observer and grading system used. Interobserver reliability scored best with the Anderson system. A more succinct pseudotumor severity grading system is needed for clinical use.
OBJECTIVE: Follow-up of pseudotumors observed with metal-artefact reducing sequence (MARS)-magnetic resonance imaging (MRI) following metal-on-metal total hip arthroplasty (MoMTHA) depends on how severe these pseudotumors are graded. Several pseudotumor grading systems for MARS-MRI have emerged but little is known of their validity. We studied the intra- and interobserver reliability of three different pseudotumor grading systems in a single cohort of MoMTHA. PATIENTS AND METHODS: Two experienced musculoskeletal radiologists independently used three different pseudotumor grading systems for classifying MARS-MRI results of the same cohort of 42 MoMTHA patients (49 hips, mean follow-up 5.2 years). Intraobserver and interobserver reliability for each grading system was measured using Cohen's kappa (κ). Variance in pseudotumor severity grading between systems was analyzed. RESULTS: Intraobserver reliability on grading pseudotumor severity with the Anderson, Matthies, and Hauptfleisch grading system scored 0.47, 0.10, and 0.35 (observer 1), and 0.75, 0.38, and 0.42 (observer 2), respectively. Interobserver reliability scores for pseudotumor severity were 0.58, 0.23, and 0.34, respectively. CONCLUSIONS: Intraobserver reliability for grading pseudotumor severity on MARS-MRI ranged from poor to good, dependent on observer and grading system used. Interobserver reliability scored best with the Anderson system. A more succinct pseudotumor severity grading system is needed for clinical use.
Authors: G Grammatopoulos; G Grammatopolous; H Pandit; Y-M Kwon; R Gundle; P McLardy-Smith; D J Beard; D W Murray; H S Gill Journal: J Bone Joint Surg Br Date: 2009-08
Authors: Helen Anderson; Andoni Paul Toms; John G Cahir; Richard W Goodwin; James Wimhurst; John F Nolan Journal: Skeletal Radiol Date: 2010-07-25 Impact factor: 2.199
Authors: Ashley K Matthies; John A Skinner; Humza Osmani; Johann Henckel; Alister J Hart Journal: Clin Orthop Relat Res Date: 2012-07 Impact factor: 4.176
Authors: H Pandit; M Vlychou; D Whitwell; D Crook; R Luqmani; S Ostlere; D W Murray; N A Athanasou Journal: Virchows Arch Date: 2008-09-04 Impact factor: 4.064
Authors: Walter van der Weegen; Thea Sijbesma; Henk J Hoekstra; Koen Brakel; Peter Pilot; Rob G H H Nelissen Journal: J Arthroplasty Date: 2013-07-18 Impact factor: 4.757
Authors: A P Toms; T J Marshall; J Cahir; C Darrah; J Nolan; S T Donell; T Barker; J K Tucker Journal: Clin Radiol Date: 2007-10-24 Impact factor: 2.350
Authors: Alexander D Liddle; Keshtra Satchithananda; Johann Henckel; Shiraz A Sabah; Karuniyan V Vipulendran; Angus Lewis; John A Skinner; Adam W M Mitchell; Alister J Hart Journal: Acta Orthop Date: 2013-04-28 Impact factor: 3.717
Authors: Rami Madanat; Daniel K Hussey; Gabrielle S Donahue; Hollis G Potter; Robert Wallace; Charles Bragdon; Orhun Muratoglu; Henrik Malchau Journal: Clin Orthop Relat Res Date: 2015-08-27 Impact factor: 4.176
Authors: Matthew F Koff; Christina Esposito; Parina Shah; Mauro Miranda; Elexis Baral; Kara Fields; Thomas Bauer; Douglas E Padgett; Timothy Wright; Hollis G Potter Journal: Clin Orthop Relat Res Date: 2019-01 Impact factor: 4.176
Authors: Vincent P Galea; Inari Laaksonen; James W Connelly; Sean J Matuszak; Marc Nortje; Rami Madanat; Orhun Muratoglu; Henrik Malchau Journal: Clin Orthop Relat Res Date: 2019-02 Impact factor: 4.176
Authors: Olli Lainiala; Petra Elo; Aleksi Reito; Jorma Pajamäki; Timo Puolakka; Antti Eskelinen Journal: Acta Orthop Date: 2014-06-23 Impact factor: 3.717
Authors: Matthew F Koff; Madeleine A Gao; John P Neri; Yu-Fen Chiu; Bin Q Lin; Alissa J Burge; Edwin Su; Douglas E Padgett; Hollis G Potter Journal: Clin Orthop Relat Res Date: 2021-12-01 Impact factor: 4.755
Authors: C Smeekes; B J M Schouten; M Nix; B F Ongkiehong; R Wolterbeek; B C H van der Wal; R G H H Nelissen Journal: Skeletal Radiol Date: 2018-02-01 Impact factor: 2.199