HOME HELP FEEDBACK SUBSCRIPTIONS ARCHIVE SEARCH TABLE OF CONTENTS		QUICK SEARCH:   [advanced] Author: Keyword(s): Year:  Vol:  Page:

This Article Figures Only Full Text Full Text (PDF) Alert me when this article is cited Alert me if a correction is posted Citation Map Services Email this article to a friend Similar articles in this journal Similar articles in PubMed Alert me to new issues of the journal Download to citation manager Citing Articles Citing Articles via HighWire Citing Articles via Google Scholar Google Scholar Articles by van Rijn, J. C. Articles by den Heeten, G. J. Search for Related Content PubMed PubMed Citation Articles by van Rijn, J. C. Articles by den Heeten, G. J. Social Bookmarking                      What's this?

Observer Variation in MRI Evaluation of Patients Suspected of Lumbar Disk Herniation

¹ Department of Clinical Epidemiology and Biostatistics, Academic Medical Center, University of Amsterdam, Meibergdreef 9, Amsterdam 1105AZ, The Netherlands.
² Department of Radiology, Academic Medical Center, University of Amsterdam, Amsterdam 1105AZ, The Netherlands.
³ Department of Neurosurgery, Leiden University Medical Center, Leiden 2333ZA, The Netherlands.
⁴ Department of Neurology, Academic Medical Center, University of Amsterdam, Amsterdam 1105AZ, The Netherlands.

OBJECTIVE. Our objective was to assess observer variation in MRI evaluation in patients suspected of lumbar disk herniation.

SUBJECTS AND METHODS. Two experienced neuroradiologists independently evaluated 59 consecutive patients with lumbosacral radicular pain. Per patient, three levels (L3–L4 through L5–S1) and the accompanying roots were evaluated on both sides. For each segment, the presence of a bulging disk or a herniation and compression of the root was reported. Images were interpreted twice: once before and once after disclosure of clinical information. Interobserver agreement was expressed as unweighted kappa values.

RESULTS. Without clinical information, interobserver agreement for the presence of herniation or bulging disk was moderate (full agreement, 84%; = 0.63; 95% confidence interval [CI], 0.53–0.72). Of a total of 352 segments evaluated, there was disagreement on 58 segments (17%): bulging disk versus no defect in 26 (7.4%), bulging disk versus herniation in five (1.4%), and hernia versus no defect in 27 (7.7%). With clinical information, twice as many bulging disks were reported but no new herniations were detected. Agreement slightly decreased, but not significantly (full agreement, 77%; = 0.59; 95% CI, 0.49–0.69; p = 0.12).

CONCLUSION. On average, more than 50% of interobserver variation in MRI evaluation of patients with lumbosacral radicular pain is caused by disagreement on bulging disks. Knowledge of clinical information does not influence the detection of herniations but lowers the threshold for reporting bulging disks.

CiteULike    Complore    Connotea    Del.icio.us    Digg    Reddit    Technorati    What's this?

This article has been cited by other articles:

				L. Berlin Accuracy of Diagnostic Procedures: Has It Improved Over the Past Five Decades? Am. J. Roentgenol., May 1, 2007; 188(5): 1173 - 1178. [Full Text] [PDF]

				J C van Rijn, N Klemetso, J B Reitsma, P M Bossuyt, F J Hulsmans, W C Peul, G J den Heeten, J Stam, and C B L M Majoie Observer variation in the evaluation of lumbar herniated discs and root compression: spiral CT compared with MRI Br. J. Radiol., May 1, 2006; 79(941): 372 - 377. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]

				R. FitzGerald Performance-Based Assessment of Radiology Faculty Am. J. Roentgenol., January 1, 2006; 186(1): 265 - 265. [Full Text] [PDF]