We have located links that may give you full text access.
External validation of the Brain Tumour Reporting and Data System (BT-RADS) in the multidisciplinary managementof post-treatment gliomas.
PURPOSE: To independently and externally validate the Brain Tumour Reporting and Data System (BT-RADS) for post-treatment gliomas and assess interobserver variability.
MATERIAL AND METHODS: In this retrospective observational study, consecutive MRIs of 100 post-treatment glioma patients were reviewed by two independent radiologists (RD1 and RD2) and assigned a BT-RADS score. Inter-observer agreement statistics were determined by kappa statistics. The BT-RADS-linked management recommendations per score were compared with the multidisciplinary meeting (MDM) decisions.
RESULTS: The overall agreement rate between RD1 and RD2 was 62.7% (κ = 0.67). The agreement rate between RD1 and consensus was 83.3% (κ = 0.85), while the agreement between RD2 and consensus was 69.3% (κ = 0.79). Among the radiologists, agreement was highest for score 2 and lowest for score 3b. There was a 97.9% agreement between BT-RADS-linked management recommendations and MDM decisions.
CONCLUSIONS: BT-RADS scoring led to improved consistency, and standardised language in the structured MRI reporting of post-treatment brain tumours. It demonstrated good overall agreement among the reporting radiologists at both extremes; however, variation rates increased in the middle part of the spectrum. The interpretation categories linked to management decisions showed a near-perfect match with MDM decisions.
MATERIAL AND METHODS: In this retrospective observational study, consecutive MRIs of 100 post-treatment glioma patients were reviewed by two independent radiologists (RD1 and RD2) and assigned a BT-RADS score. Inter-observer agreement statistics were determined by kappa statistics. The BT-RADS-linked management recommendations per score were compared with the multidisciplinary meeting (MDM) decisions.
RESULTS: The overall agreement rate between RD1 and RD2 was 62.7% (κ = 0.67). The agreement rate between RD1 and consensus was 83.3% (κ = 0.85), while the agreement between RD2 and consensus was 69.3% (κ = 0.79). Among the radiologists, agreement was highest for score 2 and lowest for score 3b. There was a 97.9% agreement between BT-RADS-linked management recommendations and MDM decisions.
CONCLUSIONS: BT-RADS scoring led to improved consistency, and standardised language in the structured MRI reporting of post-treatment brain tumours. It demonstrated good overall agreement among the reporting radiologists at both extremes; however, variation rates increased in the middle part of the spectrum. The interpretation categories linked to management decisions showed a near-perfect match with MDM decisions.
Full text links
Related Resources
Trending Papers
Revascularization Strategy in Myocardial Infarction with Multivessel Disease.Journal of Clinical Medicine 2024 March 27
Intravenous infusion of dexmedetomidine during the surgery to prevent postoperative delirium and postoperative cognitive dysfunction undergoing non-cardiac surgery: a meta-analysis of randomized controlled trials.European Journal of Medical Research 2024 April 19
The Tricuspid Valve: A Review of Pathology, Imaging, and Current Treatment Options: A Scientific Statement From the American Heart Association.Circulation 2024 April 26
Consensus Statement on Vitamin D Status Assessment and Supplementation: Whys, Whens, and Hows.Endocrine Reviews 2024 April 28
Management of Diverticulitis: A Review.JAMA Surgery 2024 April 18
Interstitial Lung Disease: A Review.JAMA 2024 April 23
Get seemless 1-tap access through your institution/university
For the best experience, use the Read mobile app
All material on this website is protected by copyright, Copyright © 1994-2024 by WebMD LLC.
This website also contains material copyrighted by 3rd parties.
By using this service, you agree to our terms of use and privacy policy.
Your Privacy Choices
You can now claim free CME credits for this literature searchClaim now
Get seemless 1-tap access through your institution/university
For the best experience, use the Read mobile app