RT Journal Article
SR Electronic
T1 Reliability of a Scoring System for Qualitative Evaluation of Lymphoscintigraphy of the Lower Extremities
JF Journal of Nuclear Medicine Technology
JO J. Nucl. Med. Technol.
FD Society of Nuclear Medicine
SP 219
OP 224
DO 10.2967/jnmt.116.185710
VO 45
IS 3
A1 Mojgan Ebrahim
A1 Irina Savitcheva
A1 Rimma Axelsson
YR 2017
UL http://tech.snmjournals.org/content/45/3/219.abstract
AB Lymphoscintigraphy is an imaging technique to diagnose and characterize the severity of edema in the upper and lower extremities. In lymphoscintigraphy, a scoring system can increase the ability to differentiate between diagnoses, but the use of any scoring system requires sufficient reliability. Our aim was to determine the inter- and intraobserver reliability of a proposed scoring system for visual interpretation of lymphoscintigrams of the lower extremities. Methods: The lymphoscintigrams of 81 persons were randomly selected from our database for retrospective evaluation. Two nuclear medicine physicians scored these scans according to the 8 criteria of a proposed scoring system for visual interpretation of lymphoscintigrams of the lower extremities. Each scan was scored twice 3 mo apart. The total score was the sum of the scores for all criteria, with a potential range of 0 (normal lymphatic drainage) to 58 (severe lymphatic impairment). The intra- and interobserver reliability of the scoring system was determined using the Wilcoxon signed-rank test, percentage of agreement, weighted κ, and intraclass correlation coefficient with 95% confidence interval. In addition, for 7 categories, differences in total scores between and within observers were determined. Results: We found some insignificant differences between observers. Percentage agreement was high or very high, at 82.7%–99.4% between observers and 84.6%–99.4% within observers. For each criterion of the scoring system, the κ-correlations showed moderate to very good inter- or intraobserver reliability. The total scores for all criteria had good inter- and intraobserver reliability. Regarding the interobserver comparison, 66% and 64% of the difference in total scores were within ±1 scale point (−1, +1), and regarding the intraobserver comparison, 68% and 72% of the difference in total scores were within ±1 scale point. Conclusion: The proposed scoring system is a reliable tool for visual qualitative evaluation of lymph transport problems in patients with lymphedema of the lower extremities.