HOME HELP FEEDBACK SUBSCRIPTIONS ARCHIVE SEARCH TABLE OF CONTENTS		QUICK SEARCH:   [advanced] Author: Keyword(s): Year:  Vol:  Page:

This Article Figures Only Full Text Full Text (PDF) Submit a response Alert me when this article is cited Alert me when eLetters are posted Alert me if a correction is posted Citation Map Services Email this article to a friend Similar articles in this journal Similar articles in PubMed Alert me to new issues of the journal Download to citation manager Citing Articles Citing Articles via Google Scholar Google Scholar Articles by Lee, D. E. Articles by Waldman, D. L. Search for Related Content PubMed PubMed Citation Articles by Lee, D. E. Articles by Waldman, D. L.

Assessment of Inter- and Intraobserver Agreement between Intravascular US and Aortic Angiography of Thoracic Aortic Injury¹

¹ From the Department of Radiology, University of Rochester Medical Center, 601 Elmwood Ave, Box 648, Rochester, NY 14642. Received November 6, 2000; revision requested December 23; final revision received August 5, 2002; accepted September 26. Address correspondence to D.E.L. (e-mail: david_lee@urmc.rochester.edu).

PURPOSE: To compare inter- and intraobserver agreement at thoracic aortic angiography with that at intravascular ultrasonography (US) in the work-up of patients suspected of having thoracic aortic injury.

MATERIALS AND METHODS: Three blinded readers performed a retrospective review of 95 thoracic aortic angiograms and 23 intravascular US images obtained in patients suspected of having traumatic aortic injury. Inter- and intraobserver agreement in the interpretation of the thoracic aortic angiograms and intravascular US images were determined by using Cohen statistics. In addition, differences among demographic groups were evaluated by using bivariate analysis.

RESULTS: Interobserver agreement was lowest in the interpretation of indeterminate angiograms ( = 0.55) and highest in the interpretation of determinate angiograms ( = 0.71). In contrast, interobserver agreement in the interpretation of intravascular US images was excellent. For all groups, intraobserver agreement in the interpretation of aortic angiograms was substantial and overall agreement was good ( = 0.88). Intraobserver agreement in the interpretation of intravascular US images was excellent ( = 1.00). Differences among demographic groups were not found to be significant.

CONCLUSION: Intravascular US is an adjunct to aortic angiography and yields excellent overall inter- and intraobserver agreement. Subgroups of patients who are suspected of having aortic injury and have indeterminate angiograms may benefit from undergoing intravascular US.

© RSNA, 2003

Index terms: Aorta, injuries, 562.412, 562.413, 563.412, 563.413 • Aorta, US, 562.1289, 563.1289 • Aortography, 562.121, 563.121 • Ultrasound (US), intravascular, 562.1289, 563.1289