Publication

A new publication from Dr. David Volders!

Click here to view the article.

Abstract

BACKGROUND AND PURPOSE: Noninvasive angiography is commonly used to assess the outcome of surgical or endovascular treatment of intracranial aneurysms in clinical series or randomized trials. We sought to assess whether a standardized 3-grade classification system could be reliably used to compare the CTA and MRA results of both treatments.

MATERIALS AND METHODS: An electronic portfolio composed of CTAs of 30 clipped and MRAs of 30 coiled aneurysms was independently evaluated by 24 raters of diverse experience and training backgrounds. Twenty raters performed a second evaluation 1 month later. Raters were asked which angiographic grade and management decision (retreatment; close or long-term follow-up) would be most appropriate for each case. Agreement was analyzed using the Krippendorff α (αK) statistic, and the relationship between angiographic grade and clinical management choice, using the Fisher exact and Cramer V tests.

RESULTS: Interrater agreement was substantial (αK = 0.63; 95% CI, 0.55–0.70); results were slightly better for MRA results of coiling (αK = 0.69; 95% CI, 0.56–0.76) than for CTA results of clipping (αK = 0.58; 95% CI, 0.44–0.69). Intrarater agreement was substantial to almost perfect. Interrater agreement regarding clinical management was moderate for both clipped (αK = 0.49; 95% CI, 0.32–0.61) and coiled subgroups (αK = 0.47; 95% CI, 0.34–0.54). The choice of clinical management was strongly associated with the size of the residuum (mean Cramer V = 0.77 [SD, 0.14]), but complete occlusions (grade 1) were followed more closely after coiling than after clipping (P = .01).

CONCLUSIONS: A standardized 3-grade scale was found to be a reliable and clinically meaningful tool to compare the results of clipping and coiling of aneurysms using CTA or MRA.