A Multicenter Assessment of Interreader Reliability of LI-RADS Version 2018 for MRI and CT.

Background Various limitations have impacted research evaluating reader agreement for Liver Imaging Reporting and Data System (LI-RADS). Purpose To assess reader agreement of LI-RADS in an international multicenter multireader setting using scrollable images. Materials and Methods This retrospective study used deidentified clinical multiphase CT and MRI and reports with at least one untreated observation from six institutions and three countries; only qualifying examinations were submitted. Examination dates were October 2017 to August 2018 at the coordinating center. One untreated observation per examination was randomly selected using observation identifiers, and its clinically assigned features were extracted from the report. The corresponding LI-RADS version 2018 category was computed as a rescored clinical read. Each examination was randomly assigned to two of 43 research readers who independently scored the observation. Agreement for an ordinal modified four-category LI-RADS scale (LR-1, definitely benign; LR-2, probably benign; LR-3, intermediate probability of malignancy; LR-4, probably hepatocellular carcinoma [HCC]; LR-5, definitely HCC; LR-M, probably malignant but not HCC specific; and LR-TIV, tumor in vein) was computed using intraclass correlation coefficients (ICCs). Agreement was also computed for dichotomized malignancy (LR-4, LR-5, LR-M, and LR-TIV), LR-5, and LR-M. Agreement was compared between research-versus-research reads and research-versus-clinical reads. Results The study population consisted of 484 patients (mean age, 62 years ± 10 [SD]; 156 women; 93 CT examinations, 391 MRI examinations). ICCs for ordinal LI-RADS, dichotomized malignancy, LR-5, and LR-M were 0.68 (95% CI: 0.61, 0.73), 0.63 (95% CI: 0.55, 0.70), 0.58 (95% CI: 0.50, 0.66), and 0.46 (95% CI: 0.31, 0.61) respectively. Research-versus-research reader agreement was higher than research-versus-clinical agreement for modified four-category LI-RADS (ICC, 0.68 vs 0.62, respectively; P = .03) and for dichotomized malignancy (ICC, 0.63 vs 0.53, respectively; P = .005), but not for LR-5 (P = .14) or LR-M (P = .94). Conclusion There was moderate agreement for LI-RADS version 2018 overall. For some comparisons, research-versus-research reader agreement was higher than research-versus-clinical reader agreement, indicating differences between the clinical and research environments that warrant further study. © RSNA, 2023 Supplemental material is available for this article. See also the editorials by Johnson and Galgano and Smith in this issue.

Screening mammography in the American elderly.

BACKGROUND: Substantial differences exist in estimates of the proportion of elderly women who undergo screening mammography and the impact of race and ethnicity on mammography usage. METHODS: A representative 5% sample of elderly women living in 11 Surveillance, Epidemiology, and End Results areas from 1991 to 2001 was constructed using Medicare data. Biennial rates of screening mammography (at least one mammogram within each 2-year period) were calculated for overlapping 2-year periods, adjusting to a 2000-2001 age and race distribution. Multivariate repeated-measures logistic regression was used to examine predictors of screening usage. RESULTS: The sample included 146,669 women. Between 1991 and 2001 the age- and race-adjusted proportion of women aged 65 years and older who underwent at least biennial screening mammography increased from 35.8% to 47.9%. Mammography screening increased for all racial and ethnic groups, but remained significantly higher for non-Hispanic white women as compared with all other groups. The biennial screening rate in 2000-2001 was 50.6% for non-Hispanic white, 40.5% for African-American, 34.7% for Asian-American, 36.3% for Hispanic, and 12.5% for Native-American women. After controlling for age, site, physician access, comorbidities, education, and income, African Americans (odds ratio [OR] = 0.80, 95% confidence interval [CI] = 0.78-0.83), Asian Americans (OR=0.53, CI = 0.51-0.55), Hispanics (OR = 0.70, CI = 0.67-0.74), and Native Americans (OR=0.37, CI=0.29-0.46) were still all less likely than non-Hispanic white women to undergo screening. CONCLUSIONS: Elderly women undergo significantly less mammography screening than is suggested by self-reported surveys. All groups of non-white women undergo less screening than do white women. The magnitude of the difference in screening rates comparing Asian-American and Hispanic women with white women is especially large; however, other studies have questioned the sensitivity of Medicare data for identifying people of Asian and Hispanic ethnicity. For African-American women, the magnitude of the gap is smaller, but it is of concern that the gap in screening as compared with white women has grown over time.

Trends in inpatient treatment intensity among Medicare beneficiaries at the end of life.

OBJECTIVE: Although an increasing fraction of Medicare beneficiaries die outside the hospital, the proportion of total Medicare expenditures attributable to care in the last year of life has not dropped. We sought to determine whether disproportionate increases in hospital treatment intensity over time among decedents are responsible for the persistent growth in end-of-life expenditures. DATA SOURCE: The 1985-1999 Medicare Medical Provider Analysis and Review (MedPAR) and Denominator files. STUDY DESIGN: We sampled inpatient claims for 20 percent of all elderly fee-for-service Medicare decedents and 5 percent of all survivors between 1985 and 1999 and calculated age-, race-, and gender-adjusted per-capita inpatient expenditures and rates of intensive care unit (ICU) and intensive procedure use. We used the decedent-to-survivor expenditure ratio to determine whether growth rates among decedents outpaced growth relative to survivors, using the growth rate among survivors to control for secular trends in treatment intensity. Data Collection. The data were collected by the Centers for Medicare and Medicaid Services. PRINCIPAL FINDINGS: Real inpatient expenditures for the Medicare fee-for-service population increased by 60 percent, from $58 billion in 1985 to $90 billion in 1999, one-quarter of which were accrued by decedents. Between 1985 and 1999 the proportion of beneficiaries with one or more intensive care unit (ICU) admission increased from 30.5 percent to 35.0 percent among decedents and from 5.0 percent to 7.1 percent among survivors; those undergoing one or more intensive procedure increased from 20.9 percent to 31.0 percent among decedents and from 5.8 percent to 8.5 percent among survivors. The majority of intensive procedures in the United States were performed in the more numerous survivors, although in 1999 50 percent of feeding tube placements, 60 percent of intubations/tracheostomies, and 75 percent of cardiopulmonary resuscitations were in decedents. The proportion of beneficiaries dying in a hospital decreased from 44.4 percent to 39.3 percent, but the likelihood of being admitted to an ICU or undergoing an intensive procedure during the terminal hospitalization increased from 38.0 percent to 39.8 percent and from 17.8 percent to 30.3 percent, respectively. One in five Medicare beneficiaries who died in the hospital in 1999 received mechanical ventilation during their terminal admission. CONCLUSIONS: Inpatient treatment intensity for all fee-for-service beneficiaries increased between 1985 and 1999 regardless of survivorship status. Absolute changes in per-capita hospital expenditures, ICU admissions, and intensive inpatient procedure use were much higher among decedents. Relative changes were similar except for ICU admissions, which grew faster among survivors. The secular decline in in-hospital deaths has not resulted in decreased per capita utilization of expensive inpatient services in the last year of life. This could imply that net hospital expenditures for the dying might have been even higher over this time period if the shift toward hospice had not occurred.

Semiautomated MIP images created directly on 16-section multidetector CT console for evaluation of living renal donors.

Institutional Review Board approval was obtained and informed consent was waived for this HIPAA-compliant study. The aim of this study was to retrospectively compare the accuracy of semiautomated maximum intensity projection (MIP) images created at a 16-section multidetector CT console with three-dimensional (3D)-workstation-generated images for the definition of renal donor anatomy, with intraoperative findings as a reference standard. In examining 40 renal donors (21 men and 19 women; age range, 24-56 years; mean age, 40.4 years), the sensitivity and accuracy for mapping donor anatomy by two readers were greater than 95%, interobserver agreement was excellent (kappa = 0.89-1.00). The 95% confidence interval for sensitivity was also calculated. Simple MIPs compared well with 3D-workstation images. MIPs from a predesigned protocol on the scanner console were generated more quickly than similar images from 3D workstations; postprocessing demands (eg, for renal donors) can be quickly fulfilled at the scanner console itself. The average time to generate simple MIPs at the console was 3.4 minutes (range, 1.7-4.4 minutes), and 22.3 minutes (range, 15-30 minutes) to create images at the 3D workstation.