BACKGROUND: Growing evidence suggests that three-dimensional digital subtraction angiography (3D-DSA) is superior to 2D-DSA in detection of intracranial aneurysm (IA) remnants after clipping. With a simple, practical quantitative scale proposed to measure maximal remnant dimension on 3D-DSA, this study provides a rigorous interrater and intrarater reliability and agreement study comparing this newly established scale with a commonly used (Sindou) 2D-DSA scale. METHOD: Records of 43 patients with clipped IAs harboring various sized remnants who underwent 2D- and 3D-DSA between 2012 and 2018 were evaluated. Using the 2D and 3D scales, six raters scored these remnants and repeated the scoring task 8 weeks later. Interrater and intrarater agreement for both grading schemes were calculated using kappa (κ) statistics. RESULTS: Interrater agreement was highly significant, yielding κ-values at 95% CI (p = 0.000) of 0.225 for the first [0.185; 0.265] and 0.368 s [0.328; 0.408] time points for 2D-DSA and values of 0.700 for the first [0.654; 0.745] and 0.776 s [0.729; 0.822] time points for 3D-DSA. Intrarater agreement demonstrated κ-values between 0.139 and 0.512 for 2D-DSA and between 0.487 and 0.813 for 3D-DSA scores. CONCLUSION: Interrater and intrarater agreement was minimal or weak for 2D-DSA scores, but strong for 3D-DSA scores. We propose that baseline 3D-DSA characterization may prove more reliable when categorizing clipped IA remnants for purposes of risk stratification and lifelong follow-up.
BACKGROUND: Growing evidence suggests that three-dimensional digital subtraction angiography (3D-DSA) is superior to 2D-DSA in detection of intracranial aneurysm (IA) remnants after clipping. With a simple, practical quantitative scale proposed to measure maximal remnant dimension on 3D-DSA, this study provides a rigorous interrater and intrarater reliability and agreement study comparing this newly established scale with a commonly used (Sindou) 2D-DSA scale. METHOD: Records of 43 patients with clipped IAs harboring various sized remnants who underwent 2D- and 3D-DSA between 2012 and 2018 were evaluated. Using the 2D and 3D scales, six raters scored these remnants and repeated the scoring task 8 weeks later. Interrater and intrarater agreement for both grading schemes were calculated using kappa (κ) statistics. RESULTS: Interrater agreement was highly significant, yielding κ-values at 95% CI (p = 0.000) of 0.225 for the first [0.185; 0.265] and 0.368 s [0.328; 0.408] time points for 2D-DSA and values of 0.700 for the first [0.654; 0.745] and 0.776 s [0.729; 0.822] time points for 3D-DSA. Intrarater agreement demonstrated κ-values between 0.139 and 0.512 for 2D-DSA and between 0.487 and 0.813 for 3D-DSA scores. CONCLUSION: Interrater and intrarater agreement was minimal or weak for 2D-DSA scores, but strong for 3D-DSA scores. We propose that baseline 3D-DSA characterization may prove more reliable when categorizing clipped IA remnants for purposes of risk stratification and lifelong follow-up.