Aim (1) To determine the interobserver reliability of magnetic resonance classifications and lesion instability criteria for capitellar osteochondritis dissecans lesions and (2) to assess differences in reliability between subgroups. Methods Magnetic resonance images of 20 patients with capitellar osteochondritis dissecans were reviewed by 33 observers, 18 orthopaedic surgeons and 15 musculoskeletal radiologists. Observers were asked to classify the osteochondritis dissecans according to classifications developed by Hepple, Dipaola/Nelson, Itsubo, as well as to apply the lesion instability criteria of DeSmet/Kijowski and Satake. Interobserver agreement was calculated using the multirater kappa (k) coefficient. Results Interobserver agreement ranged from slight to fair: Hepple (k = 0.23); Dipaola/Nelson (k = 0.19); Itsubo (k = 0.18); DeSmet/Kijowksi (k = 0.16); Satake (k = 0.12). When classifications/instability criteria were dichotomized into either a stable or unstable osteochondritis dissecans, there was more agreement for Hepple (k = 0.52; p = .002), Dipaola/Nelson (k = 0.38; p = .015), DeSmet/Kijowski (k = 0.42; p = .001) and Satake (k = 0.41; p < .001). Overall, agreement was not associated with the number of years in practice or the number of osteochondritis dissecans cases encountered per year (p > .05). Conclusion One should be cautious when assigning grades using magnetic resonance classifications for capitellar osteochondritis dissecans. When making treatment decisions, one should rather use relatively simple distinctions (e.g. stable versus unstable osteochondritis dissecans; lateral wall intact versus not intact), as these are more reliable.
Quad Convolutional Layers (QCL) CNN Approach for Classification of Brain Stroke in Diffusion Weighted (DW) - Magnetic Resonance Images (MRI)
