HRCT evaluation of patients with interstitial lung disease: comparison of the 2018 and 2011 diagnostic guidelines

Author:

Nathan Steven D.1,Pastre Jean23ORCID,Ksovreli Inga2,Barnett Scott2,King Christopher2,Aryal Shambhu2,Ahmad Kareem2,Fukuda Cesar4,Ramalingam Vijaya5,Chung Jonathan H.6

Affiliation:

1. Advanced Lung Disease Program, Inova Heart and Vascular Institute, Inova Fairfax Hospital, 3300 Gallows Road, Falls Church, VA 22042, USA

2. Advanced Lung Disease Program, Inova Heart and Vascular Institute, Inova Fairfax Hospital, Falls Church, VA, USA

3. Hôpital Européen Georges Pompidou, APHP, Paris, France

4. Universidade Federal de São Paulo, Escola Paulista de Medicina, São Paulo, Brazil

5. Department of Medicine, Medical College of Wisconsin, Milwaukee, WI, USA

6. Department of Radiology, University of Chicago, Chicago, IL, USA

Abstract

Background and aims: Chest high-resolution computed tomography (HRCT) is the central diagnostic tool in discerning idiopathic pulmonary fibrosis (IPF) from other interstitial lung disease (ILDs). In 2018, new guidelines were published and the nomenclature for HRCT interpretation was changed. We sought to evaluate how clinicians’ interpretation would change based on reading HRCTs under the framework of the old versus new categorization. Materials and methods: We collated HRCTs from 50 random cases evaluated in the Inova Fairfax ILD clinic. Six ILD experts were provided the deidentified HRCTs. They were all instructed to independently provide two reads of each HRCT, based on the old and the new guidelines. Results: The kappa statistic for concordance for HRCT reads under old guidelines was 0.5, while for the new guidelines it was 0.38. Under the framework of the old guidelines, there were 22 HRCTs with unanimous consensus reads, while only 15 with the new guidelines. There were 12 HRCTs read unanimously as usual interstitial pneumonia (UIP) pattern based on both the old and the new guidelines. Ten HRCTs were read as a possible UIP pattern based on the old guidelines and were classified in nine cases as probable UIP and one indeterminate based on the new guidelines. Of the 28 inconsistent UIP HRCTs (old guidelines), 25 were read as alternative diagnosis suggested, two were read as indeterminate and one as probable UIP. Conclusion: Implementation of the new guidelines to categorize HRCTs in ILD patients appears to be associated with greater inter-interpreter variability. How or whether new guidelines improve the care and management of ILD patients remains unclear. The reviews of this paper are available via the supplemental material section.

Publisher

SAGE Publications

Subject

Pharmacology (medical),Pulmonary and Respiratory Medicine

同舟云学术

1.学者识别学者识别

2.学术分析学术分析

3.人才评估人才评估

"同舟云学术"是以全球学者为主线,采集、加工和组织学术论文而形成的新型学术文献查询和分析系统,可以对全球学者进行文献检索和人才价值评估。用户可以通过关注某些学科领域的顶尖人物而持续追踪该领域的学科进展和研究前沿。经过近期的数据扩容,当前同舟云学术共收录了国内外主流学术期刊6万余种,收集的期刊论文及会议论文总量共计约1.5亿篇,并以每天添加12000余篇中外论文的速度递增。我们也可以为用户提供个性化、定制化的学者数据。欢迎来电咨询!咨询电话:010-8811{复制后删除}0370

www.globalauthorid.com

TOP

Copyright © 2019-2024 北京同舟云网络信息技术有限公司
京公网安备11010802033243号  京ICP备18003416号-3