Renal artery stenosis.

Reich Sb
{"title":"Renal artery stenosis.","authors":"Reich Sb","doi":"10.1056/NEJM200107193450314","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"Background: Captopril-stimulated renography is widely used to screen selected groups of hypertensive patients for renal vascular disease. Evaluation of the test is a complex task. Lack of interobserver agreement on the assessment and interpretation of renographic parameters may contribute to differences in sensitivity and specificity between studies. Methods: Three experienced nuclear medicine physicians evaluated 658 renograms of 503 hypertensive patients suspected of having renal vascular disease from a large Dutch multicenter study (the Dutch Renal Artery Stenosis Intervention Cooperative [DRASTIC] study). Interobserver ~oreement on several renographic parameters was assessed by the K statistic and the intraclass correlation coefficient (ICC). Results: The interobserver agreement on the time to excretion was high: The pooled ICC was 0.90. The pooled K was :?:0.65 for the pattern of the time-activity curves, the visual aspect of the renographic images (visible uptake and kidney size), and the ju<\\.,oment on the presence of renal artery stenosis. However, the interobserver agreement on cortical retention and pelvic retention by visual inspection of the images was rather low (pooled K=0.46 and 0.52, respectively). Pelvic retention was found to complicate the interpretation of renography. Conclusions: Interobserver agreement on most of the renographic parameters was satisfactory, but the assessment of cortical retention was more difficult, in particular, in the presence of pelvic retention. Captopril renography should be interpreted with caution if pelvic retention is suspected. Interobserver variability offers one of several explanations for the differences in diagnostic test performance that are found between studies.","PeriodicalId":22312,"journal":{"name":"The British journal of clinical practice","volume":"250 1","pages":"233"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2001-07-19","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"1","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"The British journal of clinical practice","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1056/NEJM200107193450314","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 1

Abstract

Background: Captopril-stimulated renography is widely used to screen selected groups of hypertensive patients for renal vascular disease. Evaluation of the test is a complex task. Lack of interobserver agreement on the assessment and interpretation of renographic parameters may contribute to differences in sensitivity and specificity between studies. Methods: Three experienced nuclear medicine physicians evaluated 658 renograms of 503 hypertensive patients suspected of having renal vascular disease from a large Dutch multicenter study (the Dutch Renal Artery Stenosis Intervention Cooperative [DRASTIC] study). Interobserver ~oreement on several renographic parameters was assessed by the K statistic and the intraclass correlation coefficient (ICC). Results: The interobserver agreement on the time to excretion was high: The pooled ICC was 0.90. The pooled K was :?:0.65 for the pattern of the time-activity curves, the visual aspect of the renographic images (visible uptake and kidney size), and the ju<\.,oment on the presence of renal artery stenosis. However, the interobserver agreement on cortical retention and pelvic retention by visual inspection of the images was rather low (pooled K=0.46 and 0.52, respectively). Pelvic retention was found to complicate the interpretation of renography. Conclusions: Interobserver agreement on most of the renographic parameters was satisfactory, but the assessment of cortical retention was more difficult, in particular, in the presence of pelvic retention. Captopril renography should be interpreted with caution if pelvic retention is suspected. Interobserver variability offers one of several explanations for the differences in diagnostic test performance that are found between studies.
肾动脉狭窄。
背景:卡托普利刺激肾造影术被广泛用于筛选高血压患者的肾血管疾病。测试的评估是一项复杂的任务。对肾造影参数的评估和解释缺乏观察者间的一致可能导致研究之间的敏感性和特异性的差异。方法:三名经验丰富的核医学医生评估了503例疑似肾血管疾病的高血压患者的658张肾图,这些患者来自荷兰一项大型多中心研究(荷兰肾动脉狭窄干预合作研究[DRASTIC])。通过K统计量和类内相关系数(ICC)来评估观察者间对若干图像参数的一致性。结果:观察者间对排泄时间的一致性很高:合并ICC为0.90。时间-活动曲线模式、肾造影图像视觉方面(可见摄取和肾大小)的合并K为:?:0.65。肾动脉狭窄的存在。然而,通过视觉检查图像对皮质保留和骨盆保留的观察者之间的一致性相当低(合并K分别=0.46和0.52)。发现盆腔潴留使肾造影的解释复杂化。结论:观察者之间对大多数肾造影参数的一致是令人满意的,但皮质潴留的评估更加困难,特别是在盆腔潴留的情况下。如果怀疑骨盆潴留,应谨慎解读卡托普利肾造影术。观察者之间的可变性提供了研究之间发现的诊断测试表现差异的几种解释之一。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 求助全文
来源期刊
自引率
0.00%
发文量
0
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术官方微信