Gesine Knobloch1, Sarah Sweetman2, Carrie Bartels2, Amish Raval3, Georgio Gimelli3, Kurt Jacobson3, Lucian Lozonschi4, Takushi Kohmoto4, Satoru Osaki4, Christopher François2, Scott Nagle5. 1. Department of Radiology, UW - School of Medicine and Public Health, Madison, WI, USA. Electronic address: gknobloch@wisc.edu. 2. Department of Radiology, UW - School of Medicine and Public Health, Madison, WI, USA. 3. Department of Cardiology, UW - School of Medicine and Public Health, Madison, WI, USA. 4. Department of Surgery, UW - School of Medicine and Public Health, Madison, WI, USA. 5. Department of Radiology, UW - School of Medicine and Public Health, Madison, WI, USA; Department of Medical Physics, UW - School of Medicine and Public Health, Madison, WI, USA; Department of Pediatrics, UW - School of Medicine and Public Health, Madison, WI, USA.
Abstract
OBJECTIVES: To investigate intra- and inter-observer repeatability of aortic annulus CT measurements for transcatheter aortic valve replacement (TAVR) by readers with different levels of experience and evaluate the impact of different multi-reader paradigms to improve prosthesis sizing. METHODS: 82 TAVR screening CTAs were evaluated twice by three raters with six (R1 = radiologist), three (R2 = 3D-laboratory technician) or zero (R3 = medical student) years of experience. Results were translated into hypothetical TAVR size recommendations. Intra- and inter-observer repeatability between single readers and three different multi-reader paradigms ([A]: two readers, [B]: three readers, or [C]: two readers + an optional third reader) were evaluated. RESULTS: Intra-observer variability did not differ significantly (range: 50.1-67.8mm2). However, we found significant differences in mean inter-observer variance (p = 0.001). Multi-reader paradigms led to significantly increased precision (lower variability) for scenarios [B] and [C] (p = 0.03, p < 0.05). Compared to single readers, all multi-reader strategies clearly lowered the rate of discrepant device size categorization between repeated measurements (22-26% to 5-10%). CONCLUSIONS: Aortic annulus CT measurements for TAVR are highly reproducible. Multi-reader strategies provide higher precision than evaluations from single readers with different levels of experience and could effectively be implemented with two readers and an optional third reader (Paradigm C) in a clinical setting.
OBJECTIVES: To investigate intra- and inter-observer repeatability of aortic annulus CT measurements for transcatheter aortic valve replacement (TAVR) by readers with different levels of experience and evaluate the impact of different multi-reader paradigms to improve prosthesis sizing. METHODS: 82 TAVR screening CTAs were evaluated twice by three raters with six (R1 = radiologist), three (R2 = 3D-laboratory technician) or zero (R3 = medical student) years of experience. Results were translated into hypothetical TAVR size recommendations. Intra- and inter-observer repeatability between single readers and three different multi-reader paradigms ([A]: two readers, [B]: three readers, or [C]: two readers + an optional third reader) were evaluated. RESULTS: Intra-observer variability did not differ significantly (range: 50.1-67.8mm2). However, we found significant differences in mean inter-observer variance (p = 0.001). Multi-reader paradigms led to significantly increased precision (lower variability) for scenarios [B] and [C] (p = 0.03, p < 0.05). Compared to single readers, all multi-reader strategies clearly lowered the rate of discrepant device size categorization between repeated measurements (22-26% to 5-10%). CONCLUSIONS: Aortic annulus CT measurements for TAVR are highly reproducible. Multi-reader strategies provide higher precision than evaluations from single readers with different levels of experience and could effectively be implemented with two readers and an optional third reader (Paradigm C) in a clinical setting.
Authors: Ronen Gurvitch; John G Webb; Ren Yuan; Mark Johnson; Cameron Hague; Alexander B Willson; Stefan Toggweiler; David A Wood; Jian Ye; Robert Moss; Christopher R Thompson; Stephan Achenbach; James K Min; Troy M Labounty; Ricardo Cury; Jonathon Leipsic Journal: JACC Cardiovasc Interv Date: 2011-11 Impact factor: 11.195
Authors: Craig R Smith; Martin B Leon; Michael J Mack; D Craig Miller; Jeffrey W Moses; Lars G Svensson; E Murat Tuzcu; John G Webb; Gregory P Fontana; Raj R Makkar; Mathew Williams; Todd Dewey; Samir Kapadia; Vasilis Babaliaros; Vinod H Thourani; Paul Corso; Augusto D Pichard; Joseph E Bavaria; Howard C Herrmann; Jodi J Akin; William N Anderson; Duolao Wang; Stuart J Pocock Journal: N Engl J Med Date: 2011-06-05 Impact factor: 91.245
Authors: Borek Foldyna; Camelia Jungert; Christian Luecke; Konstantin von Aspern; Sonja Boehmer-Lasthaus; Eva Maria Rueth; Matthias Grothoff; Stefan Nitzsche; Matthias Gutberlet; Friedrich Wilhelm Mohr; Lukas Lehmkuhl Journal: Int J Cardiovasc Imaging Date: 2015-04-19 Impact factor: 2.357
Authors: Ganesh Athappan; Eshan Patvardhan; E Murat Tuzcu; Lars Georg Svensson; Pedro A Lemos; Chiara Fraccaro; Giuseppe Tarantini; Jan-Malte Sinning; Georg Nickenig; Davide Capodanno; Corrado Tamburino; Azeem Latib; Antonio Colombo; Samir R Kapadia Journal: J Am Coll Cardiol Date: 2013-04-16 Impact factor: 24.094
Authors: C Schmidkonz; M Marwan; L Klinghammer; M Mitschke; A Schuhbaeck; M Arnold; M Lell; S Achenbach; T Pflederer Journal: Eur J Radiol Date: 2014-06-19 Impact factor: 3.528
Authors: Samuel V Lichtenstein; Anson Cheung; Jian Ye; Christopher R Thompson; Ronald G Carere; Sanjeevan Pasupati; John G Webb Journal: Circulation Date: 2006-07-31 Impact factor: 29.690
Authors: Ronald K Binder; John G Webb; Alexander B Willson; Marina Urena; Nicolaj C Hansson; Bjarne L Norgaard; Philippe Pibarot; Marco Barbanti; Eric Larose; Melanie Freeman; Eric Dumont; Chris Thompson; Miriam Wheeler; Robert R Moss; Tae-hyun Yang; Sergio Pasian; Cameron J Hague; Giang Nguyen; Rekha Raju; Stefan Toggweiler; James K Min; David A Wood; Josep Rodés-Cabau; Jonathon Leipsic Journal: J Am Coll Cardiol Date: 2013-05-15 Impact factor: 24.094
Authors: Florian Schwarz; Philipp Lange; Dominik Zinsser; Martin Greif; Peter Boekstegers; Christoph Schmitz; Maximilian F Reiser; Christian Kupatt; Hans C Becker Journal: PLoS One Date: 2014-08-01 Impact factor: 3.240
Authors: Viktor Kočka; Lucie Bártová; Naďa Valošková; Marek Laboš; Jiří Weichet; Marek Neuberg; And Petr Toušek Journal: Eur Heart J Suppl Date: 2022-03-30 Impact factor: 1.803
Authors: Seyd Shnayien; Petra Gehle; Nick Lasse Beetz; Tobias Daniel Trippel; Karla Philipp; Christoph Maier; Thula Walter-Rittel Journal: Sci Rep Date: 2022-09-12 Impact factor: 4.996