Carole A Ridge1, Afra Yildirim1, Phillip M Boiselle1, Tomas Franquet1, Cornelia M Schaefer-Prokop1, Denis Tack1, Pierre Alain Gevenois1, Alexander A Bankier1. 1. From the Department of Radiology, Mater Misericordiae University Hospital, Eccles Street, Dublin 7, Ireland (C.A.R.); Department of Radiology, Gevher Nesibe Hospital, University of Erciyes, Kayseri, Turkey (A.Y.); Department of Radiology, Beth Israel Deaconess Medical Center, Harvard Medical School, Boston, Mass (P.M.B., A.A.B.); Department of Radiology, Hospital de Sant Pau, Barcelona, Spain (T.F.); Department of Radiology, Meander Medical Centre, Amersfoort, the Netherlands (C.M.S.P.); Department of Radiology, Universitair Medisch Centrum St. Radboud, Nijmegen, the Netherlands (C.M.S.P.); Department of Radiology, Epicura Hospital, Clinique Louis Caty, Baudour, Belgium (D.T.); and Department of Radiology, Erasmus Hospital, University of Brussels, Brussels, Belgium (P.A.G.).
Abstract
PURPOSE: To quantify the reproducibility and accuracy of experienced thoracic radiologists in differentiating between subsolid and solid pulmonary nodules at CT. MATERIALS AND METHODS: The institutional review board of Beth Israel Deaconess Medical Center approved this multicenter study. Six thoracic radiologists, with a mean of 21 years of experience in thoracic radiology (range, 17-22 years), selected images of 10 solid and 10 subsolid nodules to create a database of 120 nodules; this selection served as the reference standard. Each radiologist then interpreted 120 randomly ordered nodules in two different sessions that were separated by a minimum of 3 weeks. The radiologists classified whether or not each nodule was subsolid. Inter- and intraobserver agreement was assessed with a κ statistic. The number of correct classifications was calculated and correlated with nodule size by using Bland-Altman plots. The relationship between disagreement and nodule morphologic characteristics was analyzed by calculating the intraclass correlation coefficient. RESULTS: Interobserver agreement (κ) was 0.619 (range, 0.469-0.745; 95% confidence interval (CI): 0.576, 0.663) and 0.670 (range, 0.440-0.839; 95% CI: 0.608, 0.733) for interpretation sessions 1 and 2, respectively. Intraobserver agreement (κ) was 0.792 (95% CI: 0.750, 0.833). Averaged for interpretation sessions, correct classification was achieved by all radiologists for 58% (70 of 120) of nodules. Radiologists agreed with their initial determination (the reference standard) in 77% of cases (range, 45%-100%). Nodule size weakly correlated with correct classification (long axis: Spearman rank correlation coefficient, rs = 0.161 and P = .049; short axis: rs = 0.128 and P = .163). CONCLUSION: The reproducibility and accuracy of thoracic radiologists in classifying whether or not a nodule is subsolid varied in the retrospective study. This inconsistency may affect surveillance recommendations and prognostic determinations.
PURPOSE: To quantify the reproducibility and accuracy of experienced thoracic radiologists in differentiating between subsolid and solid pulmonary nodules at CT. MATERIALS AND METHODS: The institutional review board of Beth Israel Deaconess Medical Center approved this multicenter study. Six thoracic radiologists, with a mean of 21 years of experience in thoracic radiology (range, 17-22 years), selected images of 10 solid and 10 subsolid nodules to create a database of 120 nodules; this selection served as the reference standard. Each radiologist then interpreted 120 randomly ordered nodules in two different sessions that were separated by a minimum of 3 weeks. The radiologists classified whether or not each nodule was subsolid. Inter- and intraobserver agreement was assessed with a κ statistic. The number of correct classifications was calculated and correlated with nodule size by using Bland-Altman plots. The relationship between disagreement and nodule morphologic characteristics was analyzed by calculating the intraclass correlation coefficient. RESULTS: Interobserver agreement (κ) was 0.619 (range, 0.469-0.745; 95% confidence interval (CI): 0.576, 0.663) and 0.670 (range, 0.440-0.839; 95% CI: 0.608, 0.733) for interpretation sessions 1 and 2, respectively. Intraobserver agreement (κ) was 0.792 (95% CI: 0.750, 0.833). Averaged for interpretation sessions, correct classification was achieved by all radiologists for 58% (70 of 120) of nodules. Radiologists agreed with their initial determination (the reference standard) in 77% of cases (range, 45%-100%). Nodule size weakly correlated with correct classification (long axis: Spearman rank correlation coefficient, rs = 0.161 and P = .049; short axis: rs = 0.128 and P = .163). CONCLUSION: The reproducibility and accuracy of thoracic radiologists in classifying whether or not a nodule is subsolid varied in the retrospective study. This inconsistency may affect surveillance recommendations and prognostic determinations.
Authors: Douglas E Wood; Ella A Kazerooni; Scott L Baum; George A Eapen; David S Ettinger; Lifang Hou; David M Jackman; Donald Klippenstein; Rohit Kumar; Rudy P Lackner; Lorriana E Leard; Inga T Lennes; Ann N C Leung; Samir S Makani; Pierre P Massion; Peter Mazzone; Robert E Merritt; Bryan F Meyers; David E Midthun; Sudhakar Pipavath; Christie Pratt; Chakravarthy Reddy; Mary E Reid; Arnold J Rotter; Peter B Sachs; Matthew B Schabath; Mark L Schiebler; Betty C Tong; William D Travis; Benjamin Wei; Stephen C Yang; Kristina M Gregory; Miranda Hughes Journal: J Natl Compr Canc Netw Date: 2018-04 Impact factor: 11.908
Authors: Marios A Gavrielides; Benjamin P Berman; Mark Supanich; Kurt Schultz; Qin Li; Nicholas Petrick; Rongping Zeng; Jenifer Siegelman Journal: Quant Imaging Med Surg Date: 2017-12
Authors: Jean-Paul Charbonnier; Kaman Chung; Ernst T Scholten; Eva M van Rikxoort; Colin Jacobs; Nicola Sverzellati; Mario Silva; Ugo Pastorino; Bram van Ginneken; Francesco Ciompi Journal: Sci Rep Date: 2018-01-12 Impact factor: 4.379
Authors: Kaman Chung; Colin Jacobs; Ernst T Scholten; Onno M Mets; Irma Dekker; Mathias Prokop; Bram van Ginneken; Cornelia M Schaefer-Prokop Journal: Eur Radiol Date: 2017-04-24 Impact factor: 5.315