Diagnostic accuracy and inter-reader reliability of the MRI Liver Imaging Reporting and Data System (version 2018) risk stratification and management system.

IF 0.7 Q4 RADIOLOGY, NUCLEAR MEDICINE & MEDICAL IMAGING SA Journal of Radiology Pub Date : 2022-05-19 eCollection Date: 2022-01-01 DOI:10.4102/sajr.v26i1.2386
Ranjit Singh, Mitchell P Wilson, Florin Manolea, Bilal Ahmed, Christopher Fung, Darryn Receveur, Gavin Low
{"title":"Diagnostic accuracy and inter-reader reliability of the MRI Liver Imaging Reporting and Data System (version 2018) risk stratification and management system.","authors":"Ranjit Singh,&nbsp;Mitchell P Wilson,&nbsp;Florin Manolea,&nbsp;Bilal Ahmed,&nbsp;Christopher Fung,&nbsp;Darryn Receveur,&nbsp;Gavin Low","doi":"10.4102/sajr.v26i1.2386","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"Background Hepatocellular carcinoma (HCC) can be diagnosed non-invasively, provided certain imaging criteria are met. However, the recent Liver Imaging Reporting and Data System (LI-RADS) version 2018 has not been widely validated. Objectives This study aimed to evaluate the diagnostic accuracy and reader reliability of the LI-RADS version 2018 lexicon amongst fellowship trained radiologists compared with an expert consensus reference standard. Method This retrospective study was conducted between 2018 and 2020. A total of 50 contrast enhanced liver magnetic resonance imaging (MRI) studies evaluating focal liver observations in patients with cirrhosis, hepatitis B virus (HBV) or prior HCC were acquired. The standard of reference was a consensus review by three fellowship-trained radiologists. Diagnostic accuracy including sensitivity, specificity, positive predictive value (PPV), negative predictive values (NPV) and area under the curve (AUC) values were calculated per LI-RADS category for each reader. Kappa statistics were used to measure reader agreement. Results Readers demonstrated excellent specificities (88% – 100%) and NPVs (85% – 100%) across all LI-RADS categories. Sensitivities were variable, ranging from 67% to 83% for LI-RADS 1, 29% to 43% for LI-RADS 2, 100% for LI-RADS 3, 70% to 80% for LI-RADS 4 and 80% to 84% for LI-RADS 5. Readers showed excellent accuracy for differentiating benign and malignant liver lesions with AUC values > 0.90. Overall inter-reader agreement was ‘good’ (kappa = 0.76, p < 0.001). Pairwise inter-reader agreement was ‘very good’ (kappa ≥ 0.90, p < 0.001). Conclusion The LI-RADS version 2018 demonstrates excellent specificity, NPV and AUC values for risk stratification of liver observations by radiologists. Liver Imaging Reporting and Data System can reliably differentiate benign from malignant lesions when used in conjunction with corresponding LI-RADS management recommendations.","PeriodicalId":43442,"journal":{"name":"SA Journal of Radiology","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":0.7000,"publicationDate":"2022-05-19","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC9210145/pdf/","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"SA Journal of Radiology","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.4102/sajr.v26i1.2386","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"2022/1/1 0:00:00","PubModel":"eCollection","JCR":"Q4","JCRName":"RADIOLOGY, NUCLEAR MEDICINE & MEDICAL IMAGING","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

Background Hepatocellular carcinoma (HCC) can be diagnosed non-invasively, provided certain imaging criteria are met. However, the recent Liver Imaging Reporting and Data System (LI-RADS) version 2018 has not been widely validated. Objectives This study aimed to evaluate the diagnostic accuracy and reader reliability of the LI-RADS version 2018 lexicon amongst fellowship trained radiologists compared with an expert consensus reference standard. Method This retrospective study was conducted between 2018 and 2020. A total of 50 contrast enhanced liver magnetic resonance imaging (MRI) studies evaluating focal liver observations in patients with cirrhosis, hepatitis B virus (HBV) or prior HCC were acquired. The standard of reference was a consensus review by three fellowship-trained radiologists. Diagnostic accuracy including sensitivity, specificity, positive predictive value (PPV), negative predictive values (NPV) and area under the curve (AUC) values were calculated per LI-RADS category for each reader. Kappa statistics were used to measure reader agreement. Results Readers demonstrated excellent specificities (88% – 100%) and NPVs (85% – 100%) across all LI-RADS categories. Sensitivities were variable, ranging from 67% to 83% for LI-RADS 1, 29% to 43% for LI-RADS 2, 100% for LI-RADS 3, 70% to 80% for LI-RADS 4 and 80% to 84% for LI-RADS 5. Readers showed excellent accuracy for differentiating benign and malignant liver lesions with AUC values > 0.90. Overall inter-reader agreement was ‘good’ (kappa = 0.76, p < 0.001). Pairwise inter-reader agreement was ‘very good’ (kappa ≥ 0.90, p < 0.001). Conclusion The LI-RADS version 2018 demonstrates excellent specificity, NPV and AUC values for risk stratification of liver observations by radiologists. Liver Imaging Reporting and Data System can reliably differentiate benign from malignant lesions when used in conjunction with corresponding LI-RADS management recommendations.

Abstract Image

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
MRI肝脏影像报告和数据系统(2018版)风险分层和管理系统的诊断准确性和读者间可靠性。
背景:肝细胞癌(HCC)可以无创诊断,只要满足一定的影像学标准。然而,最近的肝脏成像报告和数据系统(LI-RADS) 2018版本尚未得到广泛验证。目的:本研究旨在评估LI-RADS 2018版词典在接受过奖学金培训的放射科医生中的诊断准确性和读者可靠性,并与专家共识参考标准进行比较。方法:回顾性研究时间为2018 - 2020年。总共获得了50项增强肝脏磁共振成像(MRI)研究,评估肝硬化、乙型肝炎病毒(HBV)或既往HCC患者的局灶性肝脏观察。参考标准是由三位接受过研究金培训的放射科医生达成的共识审查。诊断准确性包括敏感性、特异性、阳性预测值(PPV)、阴性预测值(NPV)和曲线下面积(AUC)值计算每个阅读器的每个LI-RADS类别。使用Kappa统计来测量读者的同意度。结果:阅读器在所有LI-RADS类别中表现出出色的特异性(88% - 100%)和npv(85% - 100%)。灵敏度是可变的,LI-RADS 1的灵敏度为67%至83%,LI-RADS 2的灵敏度为29%至43%,LI-RADS 3的灵敏度为100%,LI-RADS 4的灵敏度为70%至80%,LI-RADS 5的灵敏度为80%至84%。AUC值> 0.90时,阅读器对肝良恶性病变的鉴别准确率极高。总体的读者间一致性为“良好”(kappa = 0.76, p < 0.001)。两两读者间一致性“非常好”(kappa≥0.90,p < 0.001)。结论:2018年版LI-RADS对放射科医生肝脏观察的风险分层具有出色的特异性、NPV和AUC值。当与相应的LI-RADS管理建议结合使用时,肝脏成像报告和数据系统可以可靠地区分良恶性病变。
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
SA Journal of Radiology
SA Journal of Radiology RADIOLOGY, NUCLEAR MEDICINE & MEDICAL IMAGING-
CiteScore
1.20
自引率
11.10%
发文量
35
审稿时长
16 weeks
期刊介绍: The SA Journal of Radiology is the official journal of the Radiological Society of South Africa and the Professional Association of Radiologists in South Africa and Namibia. The SA Journal of Radiology is a general diagnostic radiological journal which carries original research and review articles, pictorial essays, case reports, letters, editorials, radiological practice and other radiological articles.
期刊最新文献
Advanced tumour-induced osteomalacia secondary to sinonasal phosphaturic mesenchymal tumour. Imaging of pelvic floor disorders involving the posterior compartment on dynamic MR defaecography. Survey on the radiology report at Chris Hani Baragwanath Academic Hospital: Clinician and radiologist perspectives. Utility of diffusion-weighted imaging in differentiating benign and malignant breast lesions. Retrospective study of detecting oesophageal injuries post neck trauma: CTA versus fluoroscopy.
×
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