There is a newer version of the record available.

Published 2022 | Version v1
Journal article

Inter-rater reliability for assessing intracranial collaterals in patients with acute ischemic stroke. Comparing 29 raters and an artificial intelligence-based software

  • 1. Department of Radiology and Nuclear Medicine, Erasmus MC University Medical Center, Doctor Molewaterplein 40, 3015 GD, Rotterdam (Netherlands)
  • 2. Department of Radiology, Leiden University Medical Center, Leiden (Netherlands)
  • 3. Department of Radiology & Nuclear Medicine, Amsterdam University Medical Centers, location AMC, Amsterdam (Netherlands)
  • 4. Department of Radiology and Nuclear Medicine, Maastricht University Medical Center, Maastricht (Netherlands)
  • 5. Department of Neurology, Erasmus MC University Medical Center, Rotterdam (Netherlands)

Description

Outcome of endovascular treatment in acute ischemic stroke patients is depending on the collateral circulation maintaining blood flow to the ischemic territory. We evaluated the inter-rater reliability and accuracy of raters and an automated algorithm for assessing the collateral score (CS, range: 0-3) in acute ischemic stroke patients. Baseline CTA scans with an intracranial anterior occlusion from the MR CLEAN study (n=500) were used. For each core lab CS, ten CTA scans with sufficient quality were randomly selected. After a training session in collateral scoring, all selected CTA scans were individually evaluated for a visual CS by three groups: 7 radiologists, 13 junior and 9 senior radiology residents. Two additional radiologists scored CS to be used as reference, with a third providing a CS to produce a 2 out of 3 consensus CS in case of disagreement. An automated algorithm was also used to compute CS. Inter-rater agreement was reported with intraclass correlation coefficient (ICC). Accuracy of visual and automated CS were calculated. 39 CTA scans were assessed (1 corrupt CTA-scan excluded). All groups showed a moderate ICC (0.689-0.780) in comparison to the reference standard. Overall human accuracy was 65± 7% and increased to 88± 5% for dichotomized CS (0-1, 2-3). Automated CS accuracy was 62%, and 90% for dichotomized CS. No significant difference in accuracy was found between groups with different levels of expertise. After training, inter-rater reliability in collateral scoring was not influenced by experience. Automated CS performs similar to residents and radiologists in determining a collateral score.

Availability note (English)

Available from: http://dx.doi.org/10.1007/s00234-022-02984-z

Additional details

Identifiers

Publishing Information

Journal Title
Neuroradiology
Journal Volume
64
Journal Issue
12
Journal Page Range
p. 2277-2284
ISSN
0028-3940
CODEN
NRDYAB

Optional Information