Scan/rescan reliability of magnetic resonance imaging (MRI).

IF 2.6 3区 医学 Q2 CLINICAL NEUROLOGY European Spine Journal Pub Date : 2025-03-01 Epub Date: 2025-01-19 DOI:10.1007/s00586-025-08649-8
Menekse Salar Barim, M Fehmi Capanoglu, Richard F Sesek, Sean Gallagher, Mark C Schall, Ronald J Beyers, Gerard A Davis
{"title":"Scan/rescan reliability of magnetic resonance imaging (MRI).","authors":"Menekse Salar Barim, M Fehmi Capanoglu, Richard F Sesek, Sean Gallagher, Mark C Schall, Ronald J Beyers, Gerard A Davis","doi":"10.1007/s00586-025-08649-8","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Background: </strong>Magnetic resonance imaging (MRI) is increasingly used to estimate the geometric dimensions of lower lumbar vertebrae. While MRI-based measurements have demonstrated good reliability with interclass correlation coefficients (ICCs) of 0.80 or higher, many evaluations focus solely on the comparison of identical MRI images. This approach primarily reflects analyst dexterity and does not assess the reliability of the entire process, including imaging and image selection.</p><p><strong>Objective: </strong>To evaluate the inter- and intra-rater reliability of the entire process of using MRI to measure biomechanically relevant lumbar spinal characteristics, incorporating imaging, image selection, and analysis.</p><p><strong>Methods: </strong>A dataset of 144 low-back MRI scans was analyzed. Reliability assessments were performed under different conditions: (1) identical scans rated by the same analyst at different times (intra-rater reliability) and (2) distinct scans of the same subject obtained by different MRI operators and analyzed by different analysts (inter-rater reliability). Mean absolute differences in measurements were calculated, and sources of variability, such as breathing artifacts, were noted.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>Larger discrepancies were observed when comparing distinct scans analyzed by different MRI operators and analysts. In the \"worst-case\" scenario, where both the MRI operator and analyst differed, a 4.05% mean absolute difference was noted for anterior endplate measurements. This was higher than the 2.76% difference observed when analysts re-rated their own scans after one month. Despite these discrepancies, the variability in measurements was relatively low and primarily attributed to factors like breathing artifacts.</p><p><strong>Conclusion: </strong>The process of using MRI to derive biomechanical measures, particularly for bony structures, demonstrates robust reliability. Variability in measurements is minimal even under challenging conditions, supporting the use of MRI for biomechanical assessments.</p>","PeriodicalId":12323,"journal":{"name":"European Spine Journal","volume":" ","pages":"887-895"},"PeriodicalIF":2.6000,"publicationDate":"2025-03-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC11909044/pdf/","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"European Spine Journal","FirstCategoryId":"3","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1007/s00586-025-08649-8","RegionNum":3,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"2025/1/19 0:00:00","PubModel":"Epub","JCR":"Q2","JCRName":"CLINICAL NEUROLOGY","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

Background: Magnetic resonance imaging (MRI) is increasingly used to estimate the geometric dimensions of lower lumbar vertebrae. While MRI-based measurements have demonstrated good reliability with interclass correlation coefficients (ICCs) of 0.80 or higher, many evaluations focus solely on the comparison of identical MRI images. This approach primarily reflects analyst dexterity and does not assess the reliability of the entire process, including imaging and image selection.

Objective: To evaluate the inter- and intra-rater reliability of the entire process of using MRI to measure biomechanically relevant lumbar spinal characteristics, incorporating imaging, image selection, and analysis.

Methods: A dataset of 144 low-back MRI scans was analyzed. Reliability assessments were performed under different conditions: (1) identical scans rated by the same analyst at different times (intra-rater reliability) and (2) distinct scans of the same subject obtained by different MRI operators and analyzed by different analysts (inter-rater reliability). Mean absolute differences in measurements were calculated, and sources of variability, such as breathing artifacts, were noted.

Results: Larger discrepancies were observed when comparing distinct scans analyzed by different MRI operators and analysts. In the "worst-case" scenario, where both the MRI operator and analyst differed, a 4.05% mean absolute difference was noted for anterior endplate measurements. This was higher than the 2.76% difference observed when analysts re-rated their own scans after one month. Despite these discrepancies, the variability in measurements was relatively low and primarily attributed to factors like breathing artifacts.

Conclusion: The process of using MRI to derive biomechanical measures, particularly for bony structures, demonstrates robust reliability. Variability in measurements is minimal even under challenging conditions, supporting the use of MRI for biomechanical assessments.

查看原文
分享 分享
微信好友 朋友圈 QQ好友 复制链接
本刊更多论文
磁共振成像(MRI)扫描/重新扫描的可靠性。
背景:磁共振成像(MRI)越来越多地用于估计下腰椎的几何尺寸。虽然基于MRI的测量显示出良好的可靠性,类间相关系数(ICCs)为0.80或更高,但许多评估仅关注于相同MRI图像的比较。这种方法主要反映了分析人员的灵活性,而不评估整个过程的可靠性,包括成像和图像选择。目的:评估MRI测量腰椎生物力学相关特征整个过程的内部和内部可靠性,包括成像、图像选择和分析。方法:对144张腰背部MRI扫描数据集进行分析。可靠性评估是在不同的条件下进行的:(1)由同一位分析师在不同时间对相同的扫描进行评级(评级内信度);(2)由不同的MRI操作员对同一受试者进行不同的扫描并由不同的分析师进行分析(评级间信度)。计算测量的平均绝对差异,并注意到可变性的来源,如呼吸伪影。结果:当比较不同MRI操作员和分析人员分析的不同扫描时,观察到较大的差异。在“最坏”情况下,MRI操作人员和分析人员均存在差异,前终板测量结果的平均绝对差异为4.05%。这比分析师在一个月后重新评估自己的扫描结果时所观察到的2.76%的差异要高。尽管存在这些差异,但测量结果的可变性相对较低,主要归因于呼吸伪影等因素。结论:使用MRI获得生物力学测量的过程,特别是对骨结构的测量,显示出强大的可靠性。即使在具有挑战性的条件下,测量结果的可变性也很小,这支持使用MRI进行生物力学评估。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 去求助
来源期刊
European Spine Journal
European Spine Journal 医学-临床神经学
CiteScore
4.80
自引率
10.70%
发文量
373
审稿时长
2-4 weeks
期刊介绍: "European Spine Journal" is a publication founded in response to the increasing trend toward specialization in spinal surgery and spinal pathology in general. The Journal is devoted to all spine related disciplines, including functional and surgical anatomy of the spine, biomechanics and pathophysiology, diagnostic procedures, and neurology, surgery and outcomes. The aim of "European Spine Journal" is to support the further development of highly innovative spine treatments including but not restricted to surgery and to provide an integrated and balanced view of diagnostic, research and treatment procedures as well as outcomes that will enhance effective collaboration among specialists worldwide. The “European Spine Journal” also participates in education by means of videos, interactive meetings and the endorsement of educative efforts. Official publication of EUROSPINE, The Spine Society of Europe
期刊最新文献
Evaluating surgical interventions for low-grade degenerative lumbar spondylolisthesis: a network meta-analysis of decompression alone, fusion, and dynamic stabilization. Flexibility radiographs in pediatric spine surgery are often used but lack consistency. Sex-based differences in biomechanical function for chronic low back pain and how it relates to pain experience. A Mendelian randomization study to reveal gut-disc axis: causal associations between gut microbiota with intervertebral disc diseases. Efficacy and safety of lumbopelvic fixation in spinal metastasis comparing S2 Alar-iliac screw and conventional iliac screw.
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
现在去查看 取消
×
提示
确定
0
微信
客服QQ
Book学术公众号 扫码关注我们
反馈
×
意见反馈
请填写您的意见或建议
请填写您的手机或邮箱
已复制链接
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
×
扫码分享
扫码分享
Book学术官方微信
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术
文献互助 智能选刊 最新文献 互助须知 联系我们:info@booksci.cn
Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。
Copyright © 2023 Book学术 All rights reserved.
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号 京ICP备2023020795号-1