RESUMO
BACKGROUND: The measurement of optic nerve sheath diameter (ONSD) as a non-invasive method of estimating intracranial pressure has been widely reported in the literature. However, few studies have evaluated the accuracy of magnetic resonance imaging (MRI) in assessing ONSD measurements, although it is considered a very reliable method, it is not easily repeatable, expensive and is not readily available bedside. Herein, an assessment of the intra- and inter-rater reliability of ONSD assessment using MRI was conducted. METHODS: A consecutive, prospective cohort of patients with suspected idiopathic normal-pressure hydrocephalus was analyzed. ONSD MRI measurements of the transverse and sagittal diameters at a distance of 3 mm behind the papilla were evaluated twice each by two expert neuroradiologists. The correlations between MRI examiners were calculated using the concordance correlation coefficient (CCC). RESULTS: Fifty patients were included in the study. ONSD MRI average measurements were substantially higher than clinically expected (>5 mm). Considering intra-rater concordance, only one of the two neuroradiologists achieved an excellent score at CCC. Only a moderate inter-observer CCC for MRI assessment was found at all diameters. CONCLUSIONS: The use of a widespread MRI sequence (3D T1) to measure ONSD is not an accurate method since it may overestimate measurements and is dependent upon an operator.
RESUMO
OBJECTIVE: To develop and validate a novel comorbidity score (multisource comorbidity score (MCS)) predictive of mortality, hospital admissions and healthcare costs using multiple source information from the administrative Italian National Health System (NHS) databases. METHODS: An index of 34 variables (measured from inpatient diagnoses and outpatient drug prescriptions within 2 years before baseline) independently predicting 1-year mortality in a sample of 500 000 individuals aged 50 years or older randomly selected from the NHS beneficiaries of the Italian region of Lombardy (training set) was developed. The corresponding weights were assigned from the regression coefficients of a Weibull survival model. MCS performance was evaluated by using an internal (ie, another sample of 500 000 NHS beneficiaries from Lombardy) and three external (each consisting of 500 000 NHS beneficiaries from Emilia-Romagna, Lazio and Sicily) validation sets. Discriminant power and net reclassification improvement were used to compare MCS performance with that of other comorbidity scores. MCS ability to predict secondary health outcomes (ie, hospital admissions and costs) was also investigated. RESULTS: Primary and secondary outcomes progressively increased with increasing MCS value. MCS improved the net 1-year mortality reclassification from 27% (with respect to the Chronic Disease Score) to 69% (with respect to the Elixhauser Index). MCS discrimination performance was similar in the four regions of Italy we tested, the area under the receiver operating characteristic curves (95% CI) being 0.78 (0.77 to 0.79) in Lombardy, 0.78 (0.77 to 0.79) in Emilia-Romagna, 0.77 (0.76 to 0.78) in Lazio and 0.78 (0.77 to 0.79) in Sicily. CONCLUSION: MCS seems better than conventional scores for predicting health outcomes, at least in the general population from Italy. This may offer an improved tool for risk adjustment, policy planning and identifying patients in need of a focused treatment approach in the everyday medical practice.
