Ugeskrift for laeger · 2001
[Is visual assessment of MRI adequate in the investigation of patients with temporal lobe epilepsy? Evaluation of the diagnostic accuracy of the visual assessment of MRI in mesial temporal sclerosis].
Аннотация на английскомСтатьяНазвание и аннотация: Перевод пока не подготовлен
Обработка статьи · этапы, ошибки и управление
Загрузка состояния…
Ошибки и ограничения
История · было → стало
Состояние обновляется каждые 5 секунд, пока блок открыт. Процент показывается только там, где известен объём работы. Пауза останавливает продолжение этапа; текущий запрос к источнику может завершиться.
Sørensen J S, Jensen F T, Andersen P B, Nielsen M S, Pedersen B, Christensen T
Аннотация
INTRODUCTION: Is visual assessment of MRI adequate in patients with temporal lobe epilepsy? Visual versus quantitative MRI assessment of mesial temporal sclerosis (hippocampal gliosis (HG) and hippocampal atrophy (HA)).
MATERIAL AND METHODS: The MRIs of 25 patients with temporal lobe epilepsy were assessed visually by three radiologists with different levels of neuroradiological MRI experience (expert, trained, and inexperienced). Diagnosis obtained earlier by T2-relaxometry and volume measurements were considered to be the gold standard.
RESULTS: The diagnostic accuracy of visual assessment was high for unilateral HA, but low for bilateral HA and unilateral and bilateral HG, and it was not better for the expert eye than for the inexperienced. Interobserver agreement on the visual diagnosis of HG and HA (Cohen's Kappa coefficient): 0.49 (HG) and 0.84 (HA). Intraobserver reliability for the expert/trained/inexperienced observer for visual diagnosis (Kappa): 0.83/0.64/0.47 (HG) and 0.88/0.69/0.73 (HA).
DISCUSSION: Reproducibility and diagnostic accuracy of visual assessment varied unacceptably from the quantitative MRI-based diagnosis. Quantitative measurements are recommended in patients suspected of MTS.
MATERIAL AND METHODS: The MRIs of 25 patients with temporal lobe epilepsy were assessed visually by three radiologists with different levels of neuroradiological MRI experience (expert, trained, and inexperienced). Diagnosis obtained earlier by T2-relaxometry and volume measurements were considered to be the gold standard.
RESULTS: The diagnostic accuracy of visual assessment was high for unilateral HA, but low for bilateral HA and unilateral and bilateral HG, and it was not better for the expert eye than for the inexperienced. Interobserver agreement on the visual diagnosis of HG and HA (Cohen's Kappa coefficient): 0.49 (HG) and 0.84 (HA). Intraobserver reliability for the expert/trained/inexperienced observer for visual diagnosis (Kappa): 0.83/0.64/0.47 (HG) and 0.88/0.69/0.73 (HA).
DISCUSSION: Reproducibility and diagnostic accuracy of visual assessment varied unacceptably from the quantitative MRI-based diagnosis. Quantitative measurements are recommended in patients suspected of MTS.