These tools will no longer be maintained as of December 31, 2024. Archived website can be found here. PubMed4Hh GitHub repository can be found here. Contact NLM Customer Service if you have questions.


Pubmed for Handhelds

PUBMED FOR HANDHELDS

Search MEDLINE/PubMed

  • Title: Structured reporting platform improves CAD-RADS assessment.
    Author: Szilveszter B, Kolossváry M, Karády J, Jermendy ÁL, Károlyi M, Panajotu A, Bagyura Z, Vecsey-Nagy M, Cury RC, Leipsic JA, Merkely B, Maurovich-Horvat P.
    Journal: J Cardiovasc Comput Tomogr; 2017 Nov; 11(6):449-454. PubMed ID: 28941999.
    Abstract:
    BACKGROUND: Structured reporting in cardiac imaging is strongly encouraged to improve quality through consistency. The Coronary Artery Disease - Reporting and Data System (CAD-RADS) was recently introduced to facilitate interdisciplinary communication of coronary CT angiography (CTA) results. We aimed to assess the agreement between manual and automated CAD-RADS classification using a structured reporting platform. METHODS: Five readers prospectively interpreted 500 coronary CT angiographies using a structured reporting platform that automatically calculates the CAD-RADS score based on stenosis and plaque parameters manually entered by the reader. In addition, all readers manually assessed CAD-RADS blinded to the automatically derived results, which was used as the reference standard. We evaluated factors influencing reader performance including CAD-RADS training, clinical load, time of the day and level of expertise. RESULTS: Total agreement between manual and automated classification was 80.2%. Agreement in stenosis categories was 86.7%, whereas the agreement in modifiers was 95.8% for "N", 96.8% for "S", 95.6% for "V" and 99.4% for "G". Agreement for V improved after CAD-RADS training (p = 0.047). Time of the day and clinical load did not influence reader performance (p > 0.05 both). Less experienced readers had a higher total agreement as compared to more experienced readers (87.0% vs 78.0%, respectively; p = 0.011). CONCLUSIONS: Even though automated CAD-RADS classification uses data filled in by the readers, it outperforms manual classification by preventing human errors. Structured reporting platforms with automated calculation of the CAD-RADS score might improve data quality and support standardization of clinical decision making.
    [Abstract] [Full Text] [Related] [New Search]