Skip to main content
Top
Published in: European Journal of Nuclear Medicine and Molecular Imaging 8/2008

01-08-2008 | Original Article

Quality of planar whole-body bone scan interpretations—a nationwide survey

Published in: European Journal of Nuclear Medicine and Molecular Imaging | Issue 8/2008

Login to get access

Abstract

Purpose

The purpose of this study was to investigate, in a nationwide study, the inter-observer variation and performance in interpretations of bone scans regarding the presence or absence of bone metastases.

Methods

Bone scan images from 59 patients with breast or prostate cancer, who had undergone scintigraphy due to suspected bone metastatic disease, were studied. The patients were selected to reflect the spectrum of pathology found in everyday clinical work. Whole body images, anterior and posterior views, were sent to all 30 hospitals in Sweden that perform bone scans. Thirty-seven observers from 18 hospitals agreed to participate in the study. They were asked to classify each of the patient studies regarding the presence of bone metastasis, using a four-point scale. Each observer’s classifications were pairwise compared with the classifications made by all the other observers, resulting in 666 pairs of comparisons. The interpretations of the 37 observers were also compared with the final clinical assessment, which was based on follow-up scans and other clinical data.

Results

On average, two observers agreed on 64% of the bone scan classifications. Kappa values ranged between 0.16 and 0.82, with a mean of 0.48. Sensitivity and specificity for the observers compared with the final clinical assessment were 77% and 96%, respectively, for detecting bone metastases in planar whole-body bone scanning.

Conclusion

Moderate inter-observer agreement was found when observers were compared pairwise. False-negative errors seem to be the major problem in the interpretations of bone scan images, whilst the specificities for the observers were high.
Literature
1.
go back to reference Tryciecky EW, Gottschalk A, Ludema K. Oncologic imaging: interactions of nuclear medicine with CT and MRI using the bone scan as a model. Semin Nucl Med 1997;27:142–51.PubMedCrossRef Tryciecky EW, Gottschalk A, Ludema K. Oncologic imaging: interactions of nuclear medicine with CT and MRI using the bone scan as a model. Semin Nucl Med 1997;27:142–51.PubMedCrossRef
2.
go back to reference Rossing N, Munck O, Nielsen SP, Andersen KW. What do early bone scans tell about breast cancer patients? Eur J Cancer Clin Oncol 1982;18:629–36.PubMedCrossRef Rossing N, Munck O, Nielsen SP, Andersen KW. What do early bone scans tell about breast cancer patients? Eur J Cancer Clin Oncol 1982;18:629–36.PubMedCrossRef
3.
go back to reference McKillop JH, Williams ED, Harding LK. Consistency in nuclear medicine reporting—a pilot study using bone scans. Nucl Med Commun 1990;11:253–60.PubMedCrossRef McKillop JH, Williams ED, Harding LK. Consistency in nuclear medicine reporting—a pilot study using bone scans. Nucl Med Commun 1990;11:253–60.PubMedCrossRef
4.
go back to reference Peters AM, Bomanji J, Costa DC, Ell PJ, Gordon I, Henderson BL, et al. Clinical audit in nuclear medicine. Nucl Med Commun 2004;25:97–103.PubMedCrossRef Peters AM, Bomanji J, Costa DC, Ell PJ, Gordon I, Henderson BL, et al. Clinical audit in nuclear medicine. Nucl Med Commun 2004;25:97–103.PubMedCrossRef
5.
go back to reference Ore L, Hardoff R, Gips S, Tamir A, Epstein L. Observer variation in the interpretation of bone scintigraphy. J Clin Epidemiol 1996;49:67–71.PubMedCrossRef Ore L, Hardoff R, Gips S, Tamir A, Epstein L. Observer variation in the interpretation of bone scintigraphy. J Clin Epidemiol 1996;49:67–71.PubMedCrossRef
6.
go back to reference Sadik M, Jakobsson D, Olofsson F, Ohlsson M, Suurkula M, Edenbrandt L. A new computer-based decision-support system for the interpretation of bone scans. Nucl Med Commun 2006;27:417–23.PubMedCrossRef Sadik M, Jakobsson D, Olofsson F, Ohlsson M, Suurkula M, Edenbrandt L. A new computer-based decision-support system for the interpretation of bone scans. Nucl Med Commun 2006;27:417–23.PubMedCrossRef
7.
go back to reference Hendel RC, Wackers FJT, Berman DS, Ficaro E, DePuey EG, Klein L, et al. American society of nuclear cardiology consensus statement: reporting of radionuclide myocardial perfusion imaging studies. J Nucl Cardiol 2006;13:152–6.CrossRef Hendel RC, Wackers FJT, Berman DS, Ficaro E, DePuey EG, Klein L, et al. American society of nuclear cardiology consensus statement: reporting of radionuclide myocardial perfusion imaging studies. J Nucl Cardiol 2006;13:152–6.CrossRef
8.
go back to reference Bombardieri E, Aktolun C, Baum RP, Bishof-Delaloye A, Buscombe J, Chatal JF, et al. Bone scintigraphy: procedures guidelines for tumour imaging. Eur J Nucl Med Mol Imaging 2003;30:99–106. Bombardieri E, Aktolun C, Baum RP, Bishof-Delaloye A, Buscombe J, Chatal JF, et al. Bone scintigraphy: procedures guidelines for tumour imaging. Eur J Nucl Med Mol Imaging 2003;30:99–106.
9.
go back to reference Svensson E, Holm S. Separation of systematic and random differences in ordinal rating scales. Stat Med 1994;13:2437–53.PubMedCrossRef Svensson E, Holm S. Separation of systematic and random differences in ordinal rating scales. Stat Med 1994;13:2437–53.PubMedCrossRef
10.
go back to reference Svensson E, Starmark JE, Ekholm S, von Essen C, Johansson A. Analysis of interobserver disagreement in the assessment of subarachnoid blood and acute hydrocephalus on CT scans. Neurol Res 1996;18:487–94.PubMed Svensson E, Starmark JE, Ekholm S, von Essen C, Johansson A. Analysis of interobserver disagreement in the assessment of subarachnoid blood and acute hydrocephalus on CT scans. Neurol Res 1996;18:487–94.PubMed
11.
go back to reference Shackleton M, Yuen K, Little AF, Schlicht S, McLachlan SA. Reliability of X-rays and bone scans for the assessment in skeletal metastases for breast cancer. Intern Med J 2004;34:615–20.PubMedCrossRef Shackleton M, Yuen K, Little AF, Schlicht S, McLachlan SA. Reliability of X-rays and bone scans for the assessment in skeletal metastases for breast cancer. Intern Med J 2004;34:615–20.PubMedCrossRef
Metadata
Title
Quality of planar whole-body bone scan interpretations—a nationwide survey
Publication date
01-08-2008
Published in
European Journal of Nuclear Medicine and Molecular Imaging / Issue 8/2008
Print ISSN: 1619-7070
Electronic ISSN: 1619-7089
DOI
https://doi.org/10.1007/s00259-008-0721-5

Other articles of this Issue 8/2008

European Journal of Nuclear Medicine and Molecular Imaging 8/2008 Go to the issue