Evidence map›Paper›PMID 34268596›Full record

Observational studyEuropean radiology2022

Abdominal fellowship-trained versus generalist radiologist accuracy when interpreting MR and CT for the diagnosis of appendicitis.

Rebecca L Bracken, John B Harringa, B Keegan Markhardt, Newrhee Kim, John K Park, Douglas R Kitchin, Jessica B Robbins, Timothy J Ziemlewicz, Jen Birstler, Michael J Ryan and 4 more

Erratum issuedOpen access · greenAbstract readObservational Study
In one paragraph

Observational study in European radiology, 2022. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. An erratum has been issued. Cited by 1 paper.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
1citing papers in PubMed
0.2field-weighted citation impact, top 43% of its field
1 · What the graph read from it

What it found

Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.

The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.

2 · The registry

The trial behind it

Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.

Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

1 citing paper in PubMed, 2 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Article
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

14 authors at 1 institution in 1 country.

Rebecca L BrackenBerbeeWalsh Department of Emergency Medicine, University of Wisconsin-Madison, Madison, WI, USA.
John B HarringaBerbeeWalsh Department of Emergency Medicine, University of Wisconsin-Madison, Madison, WI, USA.
B Keegan MarkhardtDepartment of Radiology, University of Wisconsin-Madison, Madison, WI, USA.
Newrhee KimDepartment of Radiology, University of Wisconsin-Madison, Madison, WI, USA.
John K ParkDepartment of Radiology, University of Wisconsin-Madison, Madison, WI, USA.
Douglas R KitchinDepartment of Radiology, University of Wisconsin-Madison, Madison, WI, USA.
Jessica B RobbinsDepartment of Radiology, University of Wisconsin-Madison, Madison, WI, USA.
Timothy J ZiemlewiczDepartment of Radiology, University of Wisconsin-Madison, Madison, WI, USA.
Jen BirstlerDepartment of Biostatistics & Medical Informatics, University of Wisconsin-Madison, Madison, WI, USA.
Michael J RyanBerbeeWalsh Department of Emergency Medicine, University of Wisconsin-Madison, Madison, WI, USA.
Ly HoangBerbeeWalsh Department of Emergency Medicine, University of Wisconsin-Madison, Madison, WI, USA.
Perry J PickhardtDepartment of Radiology, University of Wisconsin-Madison, Madison, WI, USA.
Scott B ReederBerbeeWalsh Department of Emergency Medicine, University of Wisconsin-Madison, Madison, WI, USA.
Michael D RepplingerBerbeeWalsh Department of Emergency Medicine, University of Wisconsin-Madison, Madison, WI, USA. mdrepplinger@wisc.edu.ORCID http://orcid.org/0000-0002-6518-3907
University of Wisconsin–Madison · US

Funding

University of Wisconsin Institute for Clinical and Translational ResearchUL1TR002373 · NCATS · UNIVERSITY OF WISCONSIN-MADISON · PI ELIZABETH S BURNSIDE, Allan R. Brasier · 2017 to 2026
$75.9M
Institutional Clinical and Translational Science AwardUL1TR000427 · NCATS · UNIVERSITY OF WISCONSIN-MADISON · PI DREZNER, MARC KENNETH · 2012 to 2016
$32.2M
Institutional Career Development CoreKL2TR002374 · NCATS · UNIVERSITY OF WISCONSIN-MADISON · PI Bo Liu, Marin Leigh Schweizer · 2017 to 2026
$9.7M
Institutional Clinical and Translational Science AwardKL2TR000428 · NCATS · UNIVERSITY OF WISCONSIN-MADISON · PI DREZNER, MARC KENNETH · 2012 to 2016
$6.2M
Identifying Barriers and Facilitators to the Implementation of Radiation-Free Imaging Protocols in the Emergency DepartmentK08DK111234 · NIDDK · UNIVERSITY OF WISCONSIN-MADISON · PI REPPLINGER, MICHAEL DEAN · 2016 to 2018
$488k
NCATS NIH HHS KL2 TR000428NCATS NIH HHS KL2 TR002374NCATS NIH HHS UL1 TR000427NCATS NIH HHS UL1 TR002373NIDDK NIH HHS K08 DK111234
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

objectivesTo compare the diagnostic accuracy of generalist radiologists working in a community setting against abdominal radiologists working in an academic setting for the interpretation of MR when diagnosing acute appendicitis among emergency department patients.

methodsThis observational study examined MR image interpretation (non-contrast MR with diffusion-weighted imaging and intravenous contrast-enhanced MR) from a prospectively enrolled cohort at an academic hospital over 18 months. Eligible patients had an abdominopelvic CT ordered to evaluate for appendicitis and were > 11 years old. The reference standard was a combination of surgery and pathology results, phone follow-up, and chart review. Six radiologists blinded to clinical information, three each from community and academic practices, independently interpreted MR and CT images in random order. We calculated test characteristics for both individual and group (consensus) diagnostic accuracy then performed Chi-square tests to identify any differences between the subgroups.

resultsAnalysis included 198 patients (114 women) with a mean age of 31.6 years and an appendicitis prevalence of 32.3%. For generalist radiologists, the sensitivity and specificity (95% confidence interval) were 93.8% (84.6-98.0%) and 88.8% (82.2-93.2%) for MR and 96.9% (88.7-99.8%) and 91.8% (85.8-95.5%) for CT. For fellowship-trained radiologists, the sensitivity and specificity were 96.9% (88.2-99.5%) and 89.6% (82.8-94%) for MR and 98.4% (90.5-99.9%) and 93.3% (87.3-96.7%) for CT. No statistically significant differences were detected between radiologist groups (p = 1.0, p = 0.53, respectively) or when comparing MR to CT (p = 0.21, p = 0.17, respectively).

conclusionsMR is a reliable, radiation-free imaging alternative to CT for the evaluation of appendicitis in community-based generalist radiology practices. KEY POINTS: • There was no significant difference in MR image interpretation accuracy between generalist and abdominal fellowship-trained radiologists when evaluating sensitivity (p = 1.0) and specificity (p = 0.53). • There was no significant difference in accuracy comparing MR to CT imaging for diagnosing appendicitis for either sensitivity (p = 0.21) or specificity (p = 0.17). • With experience, generalist radiologists enhanced their MR interpretation accuracy as demonstrated by improved interpretation sensitivity (OR 2.89 CI 1.44-5.77, p = 0.003) and decreased mean interpretation time (5 to 3.89 min).

Indexed as

AppendicitisAdultChildFellowships and ScholarshipsFemaleHumansRadiologistsSensitivity and SpecificityTomography, X-Ray ComputedAppendicitisMagnetic resonance imagingTomography, X-ray computed

Identifiers

PMID34268596
PMCPMC8665009
OpenAlexW3179946325

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceTDM
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.