Search

To assess the reproducibility of the renal resistive index (RRI) in a routine clinical setting. 22 patients with a kidney allograft and 19 physicians participated in our prospective study. Within 2 hours each patient was examined by 5 different physicians using 2 out of 3 different, randomly allocated ultrasound machines. Each investigator determined the hilar and parenchymal RRI of the allograft. The reproducibility and reproducibility limit of the RRI were assessed as well as Cronbach's alpha and the intraclass correlation coefficient (ICC). The deviation of the RRI from the mean RRI over the 5 measurements was used as an indicator of reproducibility. The impact of the ultrasound machine, examiner's level of experience, and kidney function impairment (GFR 45 ml/min) was assessed with the Kruskal-Wallis test. The bivariate linear correlation of the minimal transplant distance from the body surface with the variance of the parenchymal RRI was analyzed. A reproducibility of 0.045 with a reproducibility limit of 0.124 was found for the parenchymal RRI. The ICC between RRIs was good with 0.852 for the parenchymal RRI and 0.868 for the hilar RRI. The type of ultrasound machine used was found to have a significant impact on the deviation of the parenchymal RRI (Kruskal-Wallis-Test, p = 0.003). Variance in serial parenchymal RRI measurements correlated significantly with the depth of the kidney transplant (p = 0.001). While the RRI is generally sufficiently reproducible, the type of ultrasound machine used and the depth of the kidney transplant within the recipient's body have a significant impact on reproducibility. · The renal resistive index (RRI) in allografts is reproducible.. · The type of ultrasound machine has an impact on the measured RRI.. · RRI reproducibility decreases with the depth of the renal allograft in the recipient..· Theilig DC, Münzfeld H, Auer TA et al. The Renal Resistive Index in Allografts: Is Sonographic Assessment Sufficiently Reproducible in a Routine Clinical Setting?. Fortschr Röntgenstr 2020; 192: 561 - 566.ZIEL: Die Überprüfung der Reproduzierbarkeit des renalen Widerstandsindex (RRI) in der Alltagssituation. An der prospektiven Studie nahmen 22 Patienten mit Nierentransplantat und 19 Untersucher teil. Jeder Patient wurde innerhalb von 2 Stunden von 5 verschiedenen Untersuchern mit insgesamt 2 von 3 verschiedenen Ultraschallgeräten untersucht, wobei jeweils hilärer und parenchymatöser RRI bestimmt wurden. Die Reproduzierbarkeit, deren Grenzwerte, der Cronbachs Alpha und die Intraklassenkorrelation (ICC) wurden ermittelt. Das Ausmaß der Abweichung vom Mittelwert der 5 Messungen wurde als Indikator für die Reproduzierbarkeit herangezogen. Mittels Kruskal-Wallis-Test wurde der Einfluss von Ultraschallgerät, Erfahrungsgrad des Untersuchers und Nierenfunktionseinschränkung (GFR 45 ml/min) ermittelt. Die bivariate lineare Korrelation der Abhängigkeit der Varianz der RRI-Messungen von der Tiefe des Nierentransplantats im Patienten wurde eruiert. Die statistische Auswertung ergab eine Reproduzierbarkeit des parenchymalen RRI von 0,045 bei einer Grenze von 0,124. Der ICC zwischen den parenchymalen und hilären RRIs lag bei 0,852 bzw. 0,868. Der Kruskal-Wallis-Test zeigte einen signifikanten Unterschied in der Reproduzierbarkeit bei unterschiedlichen Ultraschallgeräten (p = 0,003). Die Korrelation der Varianz der RRIs mit der Tiefe des Nierentransplantats im Patienten war ebenfalls signifikant (p = 0,001). Die Reproduzierbarkeit des RRI ist prinzipiell auch in der Alltagssituation gegeben, nimmt aber mit der Tiefe des Transplantats im Patienten und durch die Benutzung unterschiedlicher Ultraschallgeräte ab. · Der renale Widerstandsindex (RRI) in Nierentransplantaten ist ausreichend reproduzierbar.. · Der gemessene RRI wird vom verwendeten Ultraschallgerät beeinflusst.. · Die Reproduzierbarkeit des RRI nimmt mit der Transplantattiefe im Empfänger ab..

Background Process optimization in computed tomography (CT) and telemedicine. Purpose To compare image quality and objective diagnostic accuracy of medical-grade and consumer-grade digital displays/computer terminals for detection of intracranial aneurysms. Material and Methods Four radiologists with different levels of experience retrospectively read a total of 60 patients including 30 cases of proven therapy-naïve intracranial aneurysm detectable on a medical-grade grayscale calibrated display. They had 5 min per case reading the first 20 datasets using only axial slices, the next 20 patients using axial slices and multiplanar reconstructions (MPRs), and the last 20 patients using axial slices, MPRs, and maximum intensity projections (MIPs). Three months after the first reading session on a medical-grade display, they read all datasets again under the same standardized conditions but on a consumer-grade display. Diagnostic performance, subjective diagnostic confidence, and reading speed were analyzed and compared. Readers rated image quality on a five-point Likert scale. Results Diagnostic accuracy did not differ significantly with areas under the curve of 0.717–0.809 for all readers on both display devices. Sensitivity and specificity did not increase significantly when adding MPRs and/or MIPs. Reading speed was similar with both devices. There were no significant differences in subjective image quality scores, and overall inter-reader variability of all subjective parameters correlated positively between the two devices ( P Conclusion Diagnostic accuracy and readers’ diagnostic confidence in detecting and ruling out intracranial aneurysm were similar on commercial-grade and medical-grade displays. Additional reconstructions did not increase sensitivity/specificity or reduce the time needed for diagnosis.