Premium
Is quantitation necessary for assessment of sural nerve biopsies?
Author(s) -
Pamphlett Roger,
Sjarif Adrian
Publication year - 2003
Publication title -
muscle and nerve
Language(s) - English
Resource type - Journals
SCImago Journal Rank - 1.025
H-Index - 145
eISSN - 1097-4598
pISSN - 0148-639X
DOI - 10.1002/mus.10363
Subject(s) - sural nerve , inter rater reliability , medicine , categorization , quantitative assessment , pathology , anatomy , psychology , computer science , developmental psychology , rating scale , artificial intelligence , risk analysis (engineering)
In this study we measured the reliability and accuracy of visual assessment of certain features of sural nerve pathology. Three raters visually assessed 20 sural nerves over two sessions. Four features were categorized: (1) myelinated fiber (MF) density; (2) size loss of MFs; (3) thinly myelinated axons; and (4) axonal clusters. Intra‐ and interrater reliabilities for the categories were determined. Quantitative data were compared with the visual assessments. Percentage agreements for single raters between the two sessions ranged from 35% to 100% and 9 times out of 12 were ≥70%. Interrater reliability, however, showed a kappa‐value range of 0.03 (poor) to 0.49 (medium). In 85% of cases, visual ratings were within one category of the quantitated MF loss. However, visual categorization was poor compared with quantitation for determining size loss of MFs and myelin thickness. Quantitation needs to be considered to aid peripheral nerve pathologists in the assessment of some of the features of sural nerve biopsy specimens. Muscle Nerve 27: 562–569, 2003