Concordance Among Pathologists in the Second Cardiac Allograft Rejection Gene Expression Observational Study (CARGO II)
Why the study?
Does the 2004 ISHLT revision improve concordance among pathologists for grading cardiac allograft rejection?
Population
Cardiac allograft recipients in the Second Cardiac Allograft Rejection Gene Expression Observational Study
Design
Cohort
Authors
Discussion
Loading...
Member takes
Implication
Reliance on EMB ≥2R alone warrants caution in rejection decisions; leaves open refined ISHLT criteria or adjunctive diagnostics.
Structured PICO
Does the 2004 ISHLT revision improve concordance among pathologists for grading cardiac allograft rejection?
P
Population
Cardiac allograft recipients in the Second Cardiac Allograft Rejection Gene Expression Observational Study (CARGO II)
I
Intervention
Endomyocardial biopsy (EMB) grading using the 2004 ISHLT classification
O
Outcome
Concordance among pathologists on ISHLT grades
The 2004 ISHLT grading system for endomyocardial biopsies shows poor inter-pathologist agreement for higher grades, suggesting it should not be used in isolation for clinical decisions.
Cite This Study
Crespo‐Leiro et al. (2012) studied this question.