PulseExploreJournal ClubDebatesTrendingResearchersJournals
Instagram
HomeExploreJournal ClubTrending
Synapse
⌘+K
Synapse
February 1, 1987Circulation254 citations

Interobserver variability in the pathologic interpretation of endomyocardial biopsy results.

View Full Paper
JSJeffrey G. ShanesJGJalal K. GhaliMBM E Billingham

Key Points

  • To evaluate interobserver variability among cardiac pathologists interpreting endomyocardial biopsy specimens from patients with dilated cardiomyopathy.
  • Endomyocardial biopsy slides from N=16 patients with dilated cardiomyopathy were independently evaluated by seven cardiac pathologists.

Structured PICO

What is the degree of interobserver variability among cardiac pathologists in interpreting endomyocardial biopsy specimens from patients with dilated cardiomyopathy?

P
Population
16 patients with dilated cardiomyopathy whose endomyocardial biopsy specimens were reviewed by 7 cardiac pathologists
I
Intervention
Independent pathologic interpretation of endomyocardial biopsy slides
O
Outcome
Interobserver variability in assessing fibrosis, hypertrophy, nuclear changes, mean lymphocyte count, and myocarditissurrogate

High interobserver variability exists in the pathologic interpretation of endomyocardial biopsies for dilated cardiomyopathy, indicating a need for standardized diagnostic criteria.

Abstract

Controversy exists over the role of endomyocardial biopsy in evaluating patients with dilated cardiomyopathy, particularly in detecting myocarditis and in assessing prognosis. Interobserver variability, if high, could explain conflicting reports. To assess this possibility, we submitted biopsy specimens from 16 patients with dilated cardiomyopathy to seven cardiac pathologists. The same slides were independently reviewed by each and assessed for fibrosis, hypertrophy, nuclear changes on a 0 to 3+ scale, mean lymphocyte count per high-power field, and myocarditis. The prevalance of significant fibrosis ranged from 25% to 69%, hypertrophy from 19% to 88%, nuclear changes from 31% to 94%, and abnormal lymphocyte count from 0 to 38%. One or more pathologists diagnosed definite or possible myocarditis in 11 of the 16 patients. Of these 11 patients, three pathologists agreed about three and two pathologists agreed about five. Myocarditis was diagnosed by a single pathologist in three cases. We conclude that interobserver variability is high in interpreting biopsy specimens from patients with dilated cardiomyopathy and that quantitative and standardized methods are needed to increase diagnostic consistency.

Ask AI
Helpful
Bookmark
Share
View Full Paper

Cite This Study

Shanes et al. (1987) studied this question.

synapsesocial.com/papers/69d56e2f75589c71d767d4a6https://doi.org/10.1161/01.cir.75.2.401
Ask AI
Helpful
Bookmark
Share
View Full Paper

Also Consider

Synapse has enriched 5 closely related papers on similar clinical questions. Consider them for comparative context:

  1. 1Critical analysis of endomyocardial biopsies from patients suspected of having cardiomyopathy. II: Comparison of histology and clinical/haemodynamic information.1981 · 90 citations
  2. 2Biochemical measurements of endomyocardial biopsies1981 · 21 citations
  3. 3Prognosis and possible presymptomatic manifestations of congestive cardiomyopathy (COCM)Supported in part by grant of Deutsche Forschungsgemeinschaft, SFB 30 Kardiologie Düsseldorf.1978 · 89 citations
  4. 4Immunosuppressive therapy in patients with congestive cardiomyopathy and myocardial uptake of gallium-67.1981 · 88 citations
  5. 5Peripartum Cardiomyopathy Due to Myocarditis1982 · 207 citations