Evaluation of interoperator variance in shunt fraction calculation after transcolonic scintigraphy for diagnosis of portosystemic shunts in dogs and cats

Valerie F. Samii, Andrew E. Kyles, Craig D. Long, Linda M. Mellema, Rachel E Pollard, Philip H Kass, William J. Hornof

Research output: Contribution to journalArticle

25 Citations (Scopus)

Abstract

Objective - To determine interoperator variance in shunt fraction calculation. Design - Case series. Sample Population - 101 transrectal portoscintigraphic studies. Procedure - Results of dynamic portoscintigraphic studies were reviewed by 4 radiologists without knowledge of signalment, history, or medical profile. Results were judged to be negative or positive on the basis of the dynamic scan. Composite images were formulated, and hand-drawn regions of interest were determined for the heart and liver. Time-activity curves were generated, time-zero points were selected, curves were integrated during a 10-second interval, and shunt fractions were calculated. Results - Radiologists were in agreement regarding positive versus negative results for 99 of 101 studies. Interoperator variance in shunt fraction calculation ranged from 0.4 to 59.6%. For 51 studies with positive results, variance ranged from 2.5 to 59.6% (mean ± SD, 22.8 ± 14.5%); differences among reviewers were significant. For 48 studies with negative results, variance in shunt fraction ranged from 0.4 to 25.9% (mean, 5.3 ± 5.8%); significant differences among reviewers were not detected. Shunt fraction calculations were not exactly reproducible among radiologists in 94 and 100% of studies with negative or positive results, respectively. Conclusions and Clinical Relevance - Results suggest that shunt fraction values are not reproducible among operators. Range in variability was greater in studies with positive results. This factor may be of particular clinical importance in reassessment of patients after incomplete shunt ligation.

Original languageEnglish (US)
Pages (from-to)1116-1119
Number of pages4
JournalJournal of the American Veterinary Medical Association
Volume218
Issue number7
StatePublished - Apr 1 2001

Fingerprint

Surgical Portasystemic Shunt
scintigraphy
Radionuclide Imaging
Cats
Dogs
cats
dogs
Ligation
Hand
History
hands
Liver
heart
history
liver
Population
Radiologists
sampling

ASJC Scopus subject areas

  • veterinary(all)

Cite this

Evaluation of interoperator variance in shunt fraction calculation after transcolonic scintigraphy for diagnosis of portosystemic shunts in dogs and cats. / Samii, Valerie F.; Kyles, Andrew E.; Long, Craig D.; Mellema, Linda M.; Pollard, Rachel E; Kass, Philip H; Hornof, William J.

In: Journal of the American Veterinary Medical Association, Vol. 218, No. 7, 01.04.2001, p. 1116-1119.

Research output: Contribution to journalArticle

@article{ef40bafa25a84b83b1b25e97df704374,
title = "Evaluation of interoperator variance in shunt fraction calculation after transcolonic scintigraphy for diagnosis of portosystemic shunts in dogs and cats",
abstract = "Objective - To determine interoperator variance in shunt fraction calculation. Design - Case series. Sample Population - 101 transrectal portoscintigraphic studies. Procedure - Results of dynamic portoscintigraphic studies were reviewed by 4 radiologists without knowledge of signalment, history, or medical profile. Results were judged to be negative or positive on the basis of the dynamic scan. Composite images were formulated, and hand-drawn regions of interest were determined for the heart and liver. Time-activity curves were generated, time-zero points were selected, curves were integrated during a 10-second interval, and shunt fractions were calculated. Results - Radiologists were in agreement regarding positive versus negative results for 99 of 101 studies. Interoperator variance in shunt fraction calculation ranged from 0.4 to 59.6{\%}. For 51 studies with positive results, variance ranged from 2.5 to 59.6{\%} (mean ± SD, 22.8 ± 14.5{\%}); differences among reviewers were significant. For 48 studies with negative results, variance in shunt fraction ranged from 0.4 to 25.9{\%} (mean, 5.3 ± 5.8{\%}); significant differences among reviewers were not detected. Shunt fraction calculations were not exactly reproducible among radiologists in 94 and 100{\%} of studies with negative or positive results, respectively. Conclusions and Clinical Relevance - Results suggest that shunt fraction values are not reproducible among operators. Range in variability was greater in studies with positive results. This factor may be of particular clinical importance in reassessment of patients after incomplete shunt ligation.",
author = "Samii, {Valerie F.} and Kyles, {Andrew E.} and Long, {Craig D.} and Mellema, {Linda M.} and Pollard, {Rachel E} and Kass, {Philip H} and Hornof, {William J.}",
year = "2001",
month = "4",
day = "1",
language = "English (US)",
volume = "218",
pages = "1116--1119",
journal = "Journal of the American Veterinary Medical Association",
issn = "0003-1488",
publisher = "American Veterinary Medical Association",
number = "7",

}

TY - JOUR

T1 - Evaluation of interoperator variance in shunt fraction calculation after transcolonic scintigraphy for diagnosis of portosystemic shunts in dogs and cats

AU - Samii, Valerie F.

AU - Kyles, Andrew E.

AU - Long, Craig D.

AU - Mellema, Linda M.

AU - Pollard, Rachel E

AU - Kass, Philip H

AU - Hornof, William J.

PY - 2001/4/1

Y1 - 2001/4/1

N2 - Objective - To determine interoperator variance in shunt fraction calculation. Design - Case series. Sample Population - 101 transrectal portoscintigraphic studies. Procedure - Results of dynamic portoscintigraphic studies were reviewed by 4 radiologists without knowledge of signalment, history, or medical profile. Results were judged to be negative or positive on the basis of the dynamic scan. Composite images were formulated, and hand-drawn regions of interest were determined for the heart and liver. Time-activity curves were generated, time-zero points were selected, curves were integrated during a 10-second interval, and shunt fractions were calculated. Results - Radiologists were in agreement regarding positive versus negative results for 99 of 101 studies. Interoperator variance in shunt fraction calculation ranged from 0.4 to 59.6%. For 51 studies with positive results, variance ranged from 2.5 to 59.6% (mean ± SD, 22.8 ± 14.5%); differences among reviewers were significant. For 48 studies with negative results, variance in shunt fraction ranged from 0.4 to 25.9% (mean, 5.3 ± 5.8%); significant differences among reviewers were not detected. Shunt fraction calculations were not exactly reproducible among radiologists in 94 and 100% of studies with negative or positive results, respectively. Conclusions and Clinical Relevance - Results suggest that shunt fraction values are not reproducible among operators. Range in variability was greater in studies with positive results. This factor may be of particular clinical importance in reassessment of patients after incomplete shunt ligation.

AB - Objective - To determine interoperator variance in shunt fraction calculation. Design - Case series. Sample Population - 101 transrectal portoscintigraphic studies. Procedure - Results of dynamic portoscintigraphic studies were reviewed by 4 radiologists without knowledge of signalment, history, or medical profile. Results were judged to be negative or positive on the basis of the dynamic scan. Composite images were formulated, and hand-drawn regions of interest were determined for the heart and liver. Time-activity curves were generated, time-zero points were selected, curves were integrated during a 10-second interval, and shunt fractions were calculated. Results - Radiologists were in agreement regarding positive versus negative results for 99 of 101 studies. Interoperator variance in shunt fraction calculation ranged from 0.4 to 59.6%. For 51 studies with positive results, variance ranged from 2.5 to 59.6% (mean ± SD, 22.8 ± 14.5%); differences among reviewers were significant. For 48 studies with negative results, variance in shunt fraction ranged from 0.4 to 25.9% (mean, 5.3 ± 5.8%); significant differences among reviewers were not detected. Shunt fraction calculations were not exactly reproducible among radiologists in 94 and 100% of studies with negative or positive results, respectively. Conclusions and Clinical Relevance - Results suggest that shunt fraction values are not reproducible among operators. Range in variability was greater in studies with positive results. This factor may be of particular clinical importance in reassessment of patients after incomplete shunt ligation.

UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/record.url?scp=0035319066&partnerID=8YFLogxK

UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/citedby.url?scp=0035319066&partnerID=8YFLogxK

M3 - Article

C2 - 11318362

AN - SCOPUS:0035319066

VL - 218

SP - 1116

EP - 1119

JO - Journal of the American Veterinary Medical Association

JF - Journal of the American Veterinary Medical Association

SN - 0003-1488

IS - 7

ER -