Evidence Hub

Non-contrast CT markers of intracerebral hematoma expansion: a reliability study

Nehme A, Ducroux C, Panzini MA, Bard C, Bereznyakova O, Boisseau W, Deschaintre Y, Diestro JDB et al.

European radiology, 2022

60 participants

Abstract

OBJECTIVES: We evaluated whether clinicians agree in the detection of non-contrast CT markers of intracerebral hemorrhage (ICH) expansion.

METHODS: From our local dataset, we randomly sampled 60 patients diagnosed with spontaneous ICH. Fifteen physicians and trainees (Stroke Neurology, Interventional and Diagnostic Neuroradiology) were trained to identify six density (Barras density, black hole, blend, hypodensity, fluid level, swirl) and three shape (Barras shape, island, satellite) expansion markers, using standardized definitions. Thirteen raters performed a second assessment. Inter- and intra-rater agreement were measured using Gwet's AC1, with a coefficient > 0.60 indicating substantial to almost perfect agreement.

RESULTS: Almost perfect inter-rater agreement was observed for the swirl (0.85, 95% CI: 0.78-0.90) and fluid level (0.84, 95% CI: 0.76-0.90) markers, while the hypodensity (0.67, 95% CI: 0.56-0.76) and blend (0.62, 95% CI: 0.51-0.71) markers showed substantial agreement. Inter-rater agreement was otherwise moderate, and comparable between density and shape markers. Inter-rater agreement was lower for the three markers that require the rater to identify one specific axial slice (Barras density, Barras shape, island: 0.46, 95% CI: 0.40-0.52 versus others: 0.60, 95% CI: 0.56-0.63). Inter-observer agreement did not differ when stratified for raters' experience, hematoma location, volume, or anticoagulation status. Intra-rater agreement was substantial to almost…

Read the paper

Related studies

Go deeper in Evidence Hub

Evidence Hub adds a study data sheet (design, sample size, evidence level, key numbers), an AI summary and a chat grounded in the paper's text.

Open this study Sign up free