Hostname: page-component-8448b6f56d-m8qmq Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-04-25T03:31:07.581Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

Inter-observer variability between radiologists reporting on cerebellopontine angle tumours on magnetic resonance imaging

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  06 February 2017

S R Teh ,
S Ranguis  and
P Fagan
S R Teh*
Affiliation:
University of New South Wales, Sydney, Australia
S Ranguis
Affiliation:
Department of Otolaryngology, St Vincent's Private Hospital, Sydney, Australia
P Fagan
Affiliation:
Department of Otolaryngology, St Vincent's Private Hospital, Sydney, Australia
*
Address for correspondence: Sheng Rong Teh, Room 1.16, 215A Anzac Parade, Kensington, NSW 2033, Australia E-mail: srong_teh@hotmail.com
Get access Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Abstract

Background:

Studies demonstrate the significance of intra- and inter-observer variability when measuring cerebellopontine angle tumours on magnetic resonance imaging, with measured differences as high as 2 mm.

Objective:

To determine intra- and inter-observer measurement variability of cerebellopontine angle tumours in a specialised institution.

Methods:

The magnetic resonance imaging maximal diameter of 12 randomly selected cerebellopontine angle tumours were independently measured by 4 neuroradiologists at a tertiary referral centre using a standard definition for maximal tumour diameter. Average deviation and intraclass correlation were subsequently calculated.

Results:

Inter-observer difference averaged 0.33 ± 0.04 mm (range, 0.0–0.8 mm). Intra-observer measurements were more consistent than inter-observer measurements, with differences averaging 0.17 mm (95 per cent confidence interval = 0.27–0.06, p = 0.002). Inter-observer reliability was 0.99 (95 per cent confidence interval = 0.97–0.99), suggesting high reliability between the readings.

Conclusion:

The use of a standard definition for maximal tumour volume provided high reliability amongst radiologists' readings. To avoid oversizing tumours, it is recommended that conservative monitoring be conducted by the same institution with thin slice magnetic resonance imaging scans.

Keywords

Cerebellopontine AngleNeuromaAcousticsObserver VariationMagnetic Resonance ImagingReproducibility Of Results
Type
Main Articles
Information
The Journal of Laryngology & Otology , Volume 131 , Supplement S1 , January 2017 , pp. S47 - S49
Copyright
Copyright © JLO (1984) Limited 2017 

Access options

Get access to the full version of this content by using one of the access options below. (Log in options will check for institutional or personal access. Content may require purchase if you do not have access.)

References

1 van de Langenberg, R, de Bondt, B, Nelemans, P, Baumert, B, Stokroos, R. Follow-up assessment of vestibular schwannomas: volume quantification versus two-dimensional measurements. Neuroradiology 2009;51:517–24Google Scholar
2 Hougaard, D, Norgaard, A, Pedersen, T, Bibby, B, Ovesen, T. Is a redefinition of the growth criteria of vestibular schwannomas needed? Am J Otolaryngol 2014;35:192–7CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
3 Marshall, AH, Owen, VM, Nikolopoulos, TP, O'Donoghue, GM. Acoustic schwannomas: awareness of radiologic error will reduce unnecessary treatment. Otol Neurotol 2005;26:512–15Google Scholar
4 Cross, J, Baguley, D, Antoun, N, Moffat, D, Prevost, A. Reproducibility of volume measurements of vestibular schwannomas - a preliminary study. Clin Otolaryngol 2006;31:123–9CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
5 Harris, GJ, Plotkin, SR, Maccollin, M, Bhat, S, Urban, T, Lev, MH et al. Three-dimensional volumetrics for tracking vestibular schwannoma growth in neurofibromatosis type II. Neurosurgery 2008;62:1314–20Google Scholar
6 Jufas, N, Flanagan, S, Biggs, N, Chang, P, Fagan, P. Quality of life in vestibular schwannoma patients managed by surgical or conservative approaches. Otol Neurotol 2015;36:1245–54Google Scholar
7 Tanaka, Y, Hongo, K, Tada, T, Kobayashi, S. What is the best method for reporting tumor diameter in vestibular schwannoma? Neurosurgery 2003;53:634–8Google Scholar
8 Yamada, I, Tsunoda, A, Noguchi, Y, Komatsuzaki, A, Shibuya, H. Tumor volume measurements of acoustic neuromas with three-dimensional constructive interference in steady state and conventional spin-echo MR imaging. J Magn Reson Imaging 2000;12:826–32Google Scholar