Add like
Add dislike
Add to saved papers

Clinical utility, reproducibility, and radiologist acceptance of ILD-RADS.

PURPOSE: To investigate the clinical utility, reproducibility, and radiologists' acceptance of the Interstitial Lung Disease Imaging-Reporting and Data System (ILD-RADS).

METHOD: In this single-institutional retrospective study, three radiologists independently reviewed the chest high-resolution CT (HRCT) scans of 111 consecutive patients diagnosed with ILDs. They assessed the HRCT pulmonary features using the ILD-RADS template and assigned an ILD-RADS category (1-4) to each scan based on the identified imaging pattern. Patients were classified into idiopathic pulmonary fibrosis (IPF) (n = 14) and non-IPF ILD (n = 97) groups based on clinical diagnoses determined by multidisciplinary discussion. Association between ILD-RADS categories and clinical diagnoses was assessed using the Chi-square test for trend. Reproducibility was evaluated using kappa (k) scores, and radiologists' acceptance of the ILD-RADS was evaluated with a questionnaire.

RESULTS: We found a significant association between the ILD-RADS categories and patients' clinical diagnoses (P ≤ 0.0001) for the three readers, with a trend toward increased assignment of ILD-RADS-1 to IPF patients (50 %-57.1 %), and ILD-RADS-4 to non-IPF patients (46.4 %-49.5 %). The ILD-RADS categories showed excellent intra-reader agreement (k = 0.873) and moderate inter-reader agreement (k = 0.440). ILD-RADS-1 and -4 categories showed the highest inter-reader agreement (k = 0.681 and 0.481, respectively). Radiologists gave a positive response to using the ILD-RADS in daily practice.

CONCLUSIONS: The clinical utility of the ILD-RADS was demonstrated by the significant association between the ILD-RADS categories and patients' clinical diagnoses, particularly the ILD-RADS-1 and -4 categories. Excellent intra-reader and moderate inter-reader reproducibility was observed. ILD-RADS has the potential to be widely accepted for standardized HRCT reporting among radiologists.

Full text links

We have located links that may give you full text access.
Can't access the paper?
Try logging in through your university/institutional subscription. For a smoother one-click institutional access experience, please use our mobile app.

Related Resources

For the best experience, use the Read mobile app

Mobile app image

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 Toggle icon

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