Dong Hwan Kim1, Sang Hyun Choi2, Ji Sung Lee3, Joon-Il Choi1. 1. Department of Radiology, Seoul St. Mary's Hospital, College of Medicine, The Catholic University of Korea, 222 Banpo-daero, Seocho-gu, Seoul, 06591, Republic of Korea. 2. Department of Radiology and Research Institute of Radiology, University of Ulsan College of Medicine, Asan Medical Center, 88 Olympic-Ro 43-Gil, Songpa-Gu, Seoul, 05505, Republic of Korea. edwardchoi83@gmail.com. 3. Department of Clinical Epidemiology and Biostatistics, University of Ulsan College of Medicine, Asan Medical Center, 88 Olympic-Ro 43-Gil, Songpa-Gu, Seoul, 05505, Republic of Korea.
Abstract
PURPOSE: To determine the inter-reader agreement of abbreviated magnetic resonance imaging (AMRI) for the detection of hepatocellular carcinoma (HCC) and explore the causes of heterogeneity between the reported results. METHODS: Original studies reporting the inter-reader agreement of AMRI for detecting HCC were identified in MEDLINE, EMBASE, and Cochrane databases. The pooled kappa coefficient (κ) was calculated using the DerSimonian-Laird random-effects model. Subgroup analyses were performed according to the AMRI protocol (non-contrast [NC]-AMRI, dynamic contrast-enhanced [DCE]-AMRI, and hepatobiliary phase [HBP]-AMRI). Meta-regression analyses were performed to further explore study heterogeneity. RESULTS: In the eight included studies (1182 patients), the overall pooled κ was 0.76 (95% confidence interval [CI], 0.70-0.82; I2 = 74.4%). The κ of NC-AMRI, DCE-AMRI, and HBP-AMRI were 0.72 (95% CI, 0.62-0.82), 0.80 (95% CI, 0.78-0.82), and 0.98 (95% CI, 0.95-1.00), respectively. In the NC-AMRI, the pooled κ of NC-AMRI using only diffusion-weighted imaging (DWI) was 0.64, which was lower than the values using two or more imaging sequences (κ = 0.74-0.77). In subgroup analysis, no study heterogeneity was noted in studies using DCE-AMRI (I2 = 0%), whereas high heterogeneity was noted with NC-AMRI (I2 = 80.5%). Especially, NC-AMRI including more than two imaging sequences showed high residual heterogeneity (I2 = 87.6%). Meta-regression analysis found that difference in reader experience was significantly associated with study heterogeneity (p = .02). CONCLUSION: AMRI for detecting HCC showed substantial inter-reader agreement across all examined protocols. NC-AMRI, notably NC-AMRI using only DWI, had relatively low inter-reader agreement. Therefore, DCE-AMRI or HBP-AMRI may be more reliable than NC-AMRI using only DWI.
PURPOSE: To determine the inter-reader agreement of abbreviated magnetic resonance imaging (AMRI) for the detection of hepatocellular carcinoma (HCC) and explore the causes of heterogeneity between the reported results. METHODS: Original studies reporting the inter-reader agreement of AMRI for detecting HCC were identified in MEDLINE, EMBASE, and Cochrane databases. The pooled kappa coefficient (κ) was calculated using the DerSimonian-Laird random-effects model. Subgroup analyses were performed according to the AMRI protocol (non-contrast [NC]-AMRI, dynamic contrast-enhanced [DCE]-AMRI, and hepatobiliary phase [HBP]-AMRI). Meta-regression analyses were performed to further explore study heterogeneity. RESULTS: In the eight included studies (1182 patients), the overall pooled κ was 0.76 (95% confidence interval [CI], 0.70-0.82; I2 = 74.4%). The κ of NC-AMRI, DCE-AMRI, and HBP-AMRI were 0.72 (95% CI, 0.62-0.82), 0.80 (95% CI, 0.78-0.82), and 0.98 (95% CI, 0.95-1.00), respectively. In the NC-AMRI, the pooled κ of NC-AMRI using only diffusion-weighted imaging (DWI) was 0.64, which was lower than the values using two or more imaging sequences (κ = 0.74-0.77). In subgroup analysis, no study heterogeneity was noted in studies using DCE-AMRI (I2 = 0%), whereas high heterogeneity was noted with NC-AMRI (I2 = 80.5%). Especially, NC-AMRI including more than two imaging sequences showed high residual heterogeneity (I2 = 87.6%). Meta-regression analysis found that difference in reader experience was significantly associated with study heterogeneity (p = .02). CONCLUSION: AMRI for detecting HCC showed substantial inter-reader agreement across all examined protocols. NC-AMRI, notably NC-AMRI using only DWI, had relatively low inter-reader agreement. Therefore, DCE-AMRI or HBP-AMRI may be more reliable than NC-AMRI using only DWI.
Authors: Kristina Tzartzeva; Joseph Obi; Nicole E Rich; Neehar D Parikh; Jorge A Marrero; Adam Yopp; Akbar K Waljee; Amit G Singal Journal: Gastroenterology Date: 2018-02-06 Impact factor: 22.682
Authors: Jorge A Marrero; Laura M Kulik; Claude B Sirlin; Andrew X Zhu; Richard S Finn; Michael M Abecassis; Lewis R Roberts; Julie K Heimbach Journal: Hepatology Date: 2018-08 Impact factor: 17.425
Authors: Julie Y An; Miguel A Peña; Guilherme M Cunha; Michael T Booker; Bachir Taouli; Takeshi Yokoo; Claude B Sirlin; Kathryn J Fowler Journal: Radiographics Date: 2020 Nov-Dec Impact factor: 5.333
Authors: So Yeon Kim; Jihyun An; Young-Suk Lim; Seungbong Han; Ji-Young Lee; Jae Ho Byun; Hyung Jin Won; So Jung Lee; Han Chu Lee; Yung Sang Lee Journal: JAMA Oncol Date: 2017-04-01 Impact factor: 31.777
Authors: François Willemssen; Quido de Lussanet de la Sablonière; Daniel Bos; Jan IJzermans; Robert De Man; Roy Dwarkasing Journal: Cancers (Basel) Date: 2022-08-17 Impact factor: 6.575