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
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.