4.7 Article

Abdominal fellowship-trained versus generalist radiologist accuracy when interpreting MR and CT for the diagnosis of appendicitis

期刊

EUROPEAN RADIOLOGY
卷 32, 期 1, 页码 533-541

出版社

SPRINGER
DOI: 10.1007/s00330-021-08163-7

关键词

Magnetic resonance imaging; Tomography; X-ray computed; Appendicitis

资金

  1. National Institute for Diabetes and Digestive and Kidney Disease
  2. National Center for Advancing Translational Sciences

向作者/读者索取更多资源

There was no significant difference in the diagnostic accuracy of MR image interpretation for acute appendicitis between generalist radiologists in a community setting and abdominal radiologists in an academic setting.
Objectives To compare the diagnostic accuracy of generalist radiologists working in a community setting against abdominal radiologists working in an academic setting for the interpretation of MR when diagnosing acute appendicitis among emergency department patients. Methods This observational study examined MR image interpretation (non-contrast MR with diffusion-weighted imaging and intravenous contrast-enhanced MR) from a prospectively enrolled cohort at an academic hospital over 18 months. Eligible patients had an abdominopelvic CT ordered to evaluate for appendicitis and were > 11 years old. The reference standard was a combination of surgery and pathology results, phone follow-up, and chart review. Six radiologists blinded to clinical information, three each from community and academic practices, independently interpreted MR and CT images in random order. We calculated test characteristics for both individual and group (consensus) diagnostic accuracy then performed Chi-square tests to identify any differences between the subgroups. Results Analysis included 198 patients (114 women) with a mean age of 31.6 years and an appendicitis prevalence of 32.3%. For generalist radiologists, the sensitivity and specificity (95% confidence interval) were 93.8% (84.6-98.0%) and 88.8% (82.2-93.2%) for MR and 96.9% (88.7-99.8%) and 91.8% (85.8-95.5%) for CT. For fellowship-trained radiologists, the sensitivity and specificity were 96.9% (88.2-99.5%) and 89.6% (82.8-94%) for MR and 98.4% (90.5-99.9%) and 93.3% (87.3-96.7%) for CT. No statistically significant differences were detected between radiologist groups (p = 1.0, p = 0.53, respectively) or when comparing MR to CT (p = 0.21, p = 0.17, respectively). Conclusions MR is a reliable, radiation-free imaging alternative to CT for the evaluation of appendicitis in community-based generalist radiology practices.

作者

我是这篇论文的作者
点击您的名字以认领此论文并将其添加到您的个人资料中。

评论

主要评分

4.7
评分不足

次要评分

新颖性
-
重要性
-
科学严谨性
-
评价这篇论文

推荐

暂无数据
暂无数据