Abstract
Objective
Intracranial plaque enhancement (IPE) is a potential biomarker of plaque vulnerability but lacks a standardized definition. While subjective assessment may be prone to observer variability, a voxel-based quantification method can detect subtle signal intensity (SI) changes. This study aimed to compare the inter-rater reliability of subjective IPE evaluation with that of a voxel-based quantification method.
Methods
Patients with stroke due to intracranial atherosclerosis were prospectively imaged using 7 T vessel wall magnetic resonance imaging. Two adjudicators independently assessed IPE, with discrepancies resolved by a third, experienced neuroradiologist. IPE distribution was quantified using a semiautomated method based on SI measurements from post-contrast T1-weighted images. The mean enhancement ratio was calculated for each plaque to assess gadolinium enhancement. Inter-rater reproducibility and the concordance between subjective and objective assessments were evaluated. Regression analysis was performed to identify plaque morphological features that influenced the reliability of subjective IPE adjudication compared to the objective method.
Results
We analyzed 75 plaques from 41 patients. Inter-rater agreement for IPE adjudication was poor (κ = 0.34). Following consensus, 43% of plaques (32/75) were classified as enhancing, whereas 57% (43/75) were non-enhancing. The agreement between subjective and objective IPE assessments was moderate (κ = 0.40, p < 0.001). Subjective assessment was more likely to reliably adjudicate IPE for plaques exhibiting >50% stenosis (odds ratio (OR), 1.04; p = 0.02) and a positive remodeling index (OR, 2.20; p = 0.02). In contrast, it was less reliable when evaluating posterior circulation plaques (OR, 0.23; p = 0.01).
Conclusion
Subjective assessment of IPE demonstrated poor inter-rater agreement and only moderate concordance with voxel-based quantification following consensus.
Keywords
Get full access to this article
View all access options for this article.
References
Supplementary Material
Please find the following supplemental material available below.
For Open Access articles published under a Creative Commons License, all supplemental material carries the same license as the article it is associated with.
For non-Open Access articles published, all supplemental material carries a non-exclusive license, and permission requests for re-use of supplemental material or any part of supplemental material shall be sent directly to the copyright owner as specified in the copyright notice associated with the article.
