Interobserver variation in interpretation of arteriography and management of severe lower leg arterial disease

Citation
Mjw. Koelemay et al., Interobserver variation in interpretation of arteriography and management of severe lower leg arterial disease, EUR J VAS E, 21(5), 2001, pp. 417-422
Citations number
26
Categorie Soggetti
Surgery
Journal title
EUROPEAN JOURNAL OF VASCULAR AND ENDOVASCULAR SURGERY
ISSN journal
10785884 → ACNP
Volume
21
Issue
5
Year of publication
2001
Pages
417 - 422
Database
ISI
SICI code
1078-5884(200105)21:5<417:IVIIOA>2.0.ZU;2-W
Abstract
Objective: arteriography is the reference standard for the assessment of th e lower leg arteries in patients with severe lower limb ischaemia. Inter ob server variation in arteriography interpretation may cause disparities with non-invasive imaging modalities. We determined interobserver variation in lower leg artery assessment with intra-arterial digital subtraction angiogr aphy (IaDSA) and subsequent patient management. Materials: iaDSA studies of patients evaluated for severe claudication (n = 5) or critical ischaemia (n = 43). Methods: arteriograms were independently judged by four observers. The popl iteal and tibial arteries were graded as fully patent, severely diseased, o ccluded ol non-diagnostic The dorsalis pedis, common and deep plantar arter y were graded as directly, indirectly or not filling the pedal arch or non- diagnostic. Agreement on grading arteries was expressed as kappa -values. T reatment plans (conservative, PTA, surgery, amputation, non-diagnostic) pro posed by each observer based on clinical information and iaDSA were compare d. Results: the rate of non-diagnostic judgements ranged from 1% in the poplit eal to 22% in the pedal auter ies. Overall agreement tons good for grading the popliteal arteries (kappa = 0.64), moderate for the tibial (kappa = 0.4 7-0.54) and fair for the pedal arteries (kappa = 0.39). Agreement was good to excellent for grading occlucled or fully patent popliteal and tibial art ery segments, and fair to moderate for grading severe disease. In 57% of ca ses at least 3 observers proposed identical treatment, which indicates fair overall agreement (kappa = 0.33). Conclusion: interobserver agreement on iaDSA is good to determine occluded or fully patent popliteal or tibial arteries, but not for severe disease. T his should be taken into account when other diagnostic modalities nr e comp ared with iaDSA. Evaluation of diagnostic modalities as concordance in trea tment plans is flawed by interindividual variation.