{"title":"Reproducibility of MRI Diagnosis of Female Genital Anomalies.","authors":"Al Shaimaa Fathi Elshetry, Mostafa Mohamad Assy, Nesma Adel Zaid, Rabab Mahmoud El-Fawakry, Mohamed Hesham Saleh Saleh Radwan, Enas Mahmoud Hamed","doi":"10.1177/08465371241252793","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><p><b>Purpose:</b> To assess and compare intrareader and interreader reproducibility of magnetic resonance imaging (MRI) diagnosis of female genital anomalies (FGAs) using the American Society for Reproductive Medicine-Mullerian anomalies classification 2021 (ASRM-MAC 2021) and European Society of Human Reproduction and Embryology-European Society for Gynecological Endoscopy (ESHRE-ESGE) 2016 classification. <b>Methods:</b> In this retrospective study, we searched our electronic MRI database from April 2021 to September 2023, selecting MRI studies with FGAs. Seventy-six consecutive studies were included and reviewed by 4 independent radiologists using both classifications. Studies were re-evaluated after 1 month. Reproducibility was assessed using kappa (κ) scores with 95% confidence intervals (CI). <b>Results:</b> Intrareader agreement for MRI diagnosis of FGAs was substantial to excellent, with κ scores ranging from 0.684 (95% CI, 0.534-0.834) to 0.985 (95% CI, 0.963-1.01) using the ASRM-MAC 2021 and from 0.743 (95% CI, 0.621-0.865) to 0.846 (95% CI, 0.719-0.973) using the ESHRE-ESGE 2016 classification. Pairwise interreader agreement was higher with the ASRM-MAC 2021, ranging from moderate (κ = 0.491; 95% CI, 0.341-0.642) to substantial (κ = 0.709; 95% CI, 0.597-0.821), compared to the ESHRE-ESGE 2016 classification, with weak (κ = 0.080; 95% CI, 0.068-0.228) to moderate (κ = 0.511; 95% CI, 0.344-0.678) agreement. Overall interreader agreement was moderate for both classifications (κ = 0.599; 95% CI, 0.562-0.638 for ASRM-MAC 2021 and κ = 0.429; 95% CI, 0.396-0.463 for ESHRE-ESGE 2016 classification), but with significant differences (non-overlapping CIs). <b>Conclusion:</b> The intrareader reproducibility was high for both classifications, whereas the interreader reproducibility was higher using the ASRM-MAC 2021, highlighting the impact of classification criteria on the reproducibility of MRI diagnosis of FGAs.</p>","PeriodicalId":55290,"journal":{"name":"Canadian Association of Radiologists Journal-Journal De L Association Canadienne Des Radiologistes","volume":" ","pages":"805-814"},"PeriodicalIF":2.9000,"publicationDate":"2024-11-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Canadian Association of Radiologists Journal-Journal De L Association Canadienne Des Radiologistes","FirstCategoryId":"3","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1177/08465371241252793","RegionNum":3,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"2024/5/25 0:00:00","PubModel":"Epub","JCR":"Q2","JCRName":"RADIOLOGY, NUCLEAR MEDICINE & MEDICAL IMAGING","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0
Abstract
Purpose: To assess and compare intrareader and interreader reproducibility of magnetic resonance imaging (MRI) diagnosis of female genital anomalies (FGAs) using the American Society for Reproductive Medicine-Mullerian anomalies classification 2021 (ASRM-MAC 2021) and European Society of Human Reproduction and Embryology-European Society for Gynecological Endoscopy (ESHRE-ESGE) 2016 classification. Methods: In this retrospective study, we searched our electronic MRI database from April 2021 to September 2023, selecting MRI studies with FGAs. Seventy-six consecutive studies were included and reviewed by 4 independent radiologists using both classifications. Studies were re-evaluated after 1 month. Reproducibility was assessed using kappa (κ) scores with 95% confidence intervals (CI). Results: Intrareader agreement for MRI diagnosis of FGAs was substantial to excellent, with κ scores ranging from 0.684 (95% CI, 0.534-0.834) to 0.985 (95% CI, 0.963-1.01) using the ASRM-MAC 2021 and from 0.743 (95% CI, 0.621-0.865) to 0.846 (95% CI, 0.719-0.973) using the ESHRE-ESGE 2016 classification. Pairwise interreader agreement was higher with the ASRM-MAC 2021, ranging from moderate (κ = 0.491; 95% CI, 0.341-0.642) to substantial (κ = 0.709; 95% CI, 0.597-0.821), compared to the ESHRE-ESGE 2016 classification, with weak (κ = 0.080; 95% CI, 0.068-0.228) to moderate (κ = 0.511; 95% CI, 0.344-0.678) agreement. Overall interreader agreement was moderate for both classifications (κ = 0.599; 95% CI, 0.562-0.638 for ASRM-MAC 2021 and κ = 0.429; 95% CI, 0.396-0.463 for ESHRE-ESGE 2016 classification), but with significant differences (non-overlapping CIs). Conclusion: The intrareader reproducibility was high for both classifications, whereas the interreader reproducibility was higher using the ASRM-MAC 2021, highlighting the impact of classification criteria on the reproducibility of MRI diagnosis of FGAs.
期刊介绍:
The Canadian Association of Radiologists Journal is a peer-reviewed, Medline-indexed publication that presents a broad scientific review of radiology in Canada. The Journal covers such topics as abdominal imaging, cardiovascular radiology, computed tomography, continuing professional development, education and training, gastrointestinal radiology, health policy and practice, magnetic resonance imaging, musculoskeletal radiology, neuroradiology, nuclear medicine, pediatric radiology, radiology history, radiology practice guidelines and advisories, thoracic and cardiac imaging, trauma and emergency room imaging, ultrasonography, and vascular and interventional radiology. Article types considered for publication include original research articles, critically appraised topics, review articles, guest editorials, pictorial essays, technical notes, and letter to the Editor.