• J Ultrasound Med · Oct 2019

    Intra- and Inter-Rater Agreement Describing Myometrial Lesions Using Morphologic Uterus Sonographic Assessment: A Pilot Study.

    • Christina Kjaergaard Rasmussen, Thierry Van den Bosch, Caterina Exacoustos, Gwendolin Manegold-Brauer, Beryl R Benacerraf, Wouter Froyman, Chiara Landolfo, Margherita Condorelli, Anne G Egekvist, Hampus Josefsson, Francesco Paolo Giuseppe Leone, Ligita Jokubkiene, Letizia Zannoni, Elisabeth Epstein, Arnaud Installé, and Margit Dueholm.
    • Department of Obstetrics and Gynecology, Aarhus University Hospital, Aarhus, Denmark.
    • J Ultrasound Med. 2019 Oct 1; 38 (10): 2673-2683.

    ObjectivesTo evaluate the intra- and inter-rater agreement for myometrial lesions using Morphologic Uterus Sonographic Assessment terminology.MethodsThirteen raters with high (n = 6) or medium experience (n = 7) assessed 30 3-dimensional ultrasound clips with (n = 20) and without (n = 10) benign myometrial lesions. Myometrial lesions were reported as poorly or well defined and then systematically evaluated for the presence of individual features. The clips were blindly assessed twice (at a 2-month interval). Intra- and inter-rater agreements were calculated with κ statistics.ResultsThe reporting of poorly defined lesions reached moderate intra-rater agreement (κ = 0.49 [high experience] and 0.47 [medium experience]) and poor inter-rater agreement (κ = 0.39 [high experience] and 0.25 [medium experience]). The reporting of well-defined lesions reached good to very good intra-rater agreement (κ = 0.73 [high experience] and 0.82 [medium experience]) and good inter-rater agreement (κ = 0.75 [high experience] and 0.63 [medium experience]). Most individual features associated with ill-defined lesions reached moderate intra- and inter-rater agreement among highly experienced raters (κ = 0.41-0.60). The least reproducible features were myometrial cysts, hyperechoic islands, subendometrial lines and buds, and translesional flow (κ = 0.11-0.34). Most individual features associated with well-defined lesions reached moderate to good intra- and inter-rater agreement among all observers (κ = 0.41-0.80). The least reproducible features were a serosal contour, asymmetry, a hyperechoic rim, and fan-shaped shadows (κ = 0.00-0.35).ConclusionsThe reporting of well-defined lesions showed excellent agreement, whereas the agreement for poorly defined lesions was low, even among highly experienced raters. The agreement on identifying individual features varied, especially for features associated with ill-defined lesions. Guidelines on minimum requirements for features associated with ill-defined lesions to be interpreted as poorly defined lesions may improve agreement.© 2019 by the American Institute of Ultrasound in Medicine.

      Pubmed     Full text   Copy Citation     Plaintext  

      Add institutional full text...

    Notes

     
    Knowledge, pearl, summary or comment to share?
    300 characters remaining
    help        
    You can also include formatting, links, images and footnotes in your notes
    • Simple formatting can be added to notes, such as *italics*, _underline_ or **bold**.
    • Superscript can be denoted by <sup>text</sup> and subscript <sub>text</sub>.
    • Numbered or bulleted lists can be created using either numbered lines 1. 2. 3., hyphens - or asterisks *.
    • Links can be included with: [my link to pubmed](http://pubmed.com)
    • Images can be included with: ![alt text](https://bestmedicaljournal.com/study_graph.jpg "Image Title Text")
    • For footnotes use [^1](This is a footnote.) inline.
    • Or use an inline reference [^1] to refer to a longer footnote elseweher in the document [^1]: This is a long footnote..

    hide…

What will the 'Medical Journal of You' look like?

Start your free 21 day trial now.

We guarantee your privacy. Your email address will not be shared.