Interobserver Agreement in the Assessment of Components of Colposcopic Grading

OBJECTIVE: To estimate the reproducibility of the assessment of visual characteristics of cervical lesions used to judge lesion grade from colposcopy. METHODS: Digitized cervical images from 862 women enrolled in the ASCUS-LSIL Triage Study were obtained after application of 5% acetic acid. Each image was later assessed online by two randomly assigned evaluators from a pool of 20 experienced colposcopists. Interobserver agreement beyond chance was assessed by kappa statistics. RESULTS: Of 862 evaluable images with paired assessments, 607 were considered to have an acetowhite lesion by both evaluators, 171 by one, and 84 by neither. Kappa values (95% confidence intervals) for agreement were 0.22 (0.17–0.27) for color, 0.24 (0.18–0.30) for margins, 0.22 (0.16–0.29) for mosaicism, 0.17 (0.11–0.23) for punctation, 0.11 (0.00–0.22) for atypical vessels, and 0.26 (0.22–0.31) for modified Reid Index score. CONCLUSION: Characteristics used to assign colposcopic grade are poorly reproducible when used to assess static cervical images from women with borderline cytology results. LEVEL OF EVIDENCE: II

[1]  Daron G Ferris,et al.  Interobserver Agreement for Colposcopy Quality Control Using Digitized Colposcopic Images During the ALTS Trial , 2005, Journal of lower genital tract disease.

[2]  Mario Sideri,et al.  Interobserver Variability of Colposcopic Interpretations and Consistency with Final Histologic Results , 2004, Journal of Lower Genital Tract Disease.

[3]  W. Grove Statistical Methods for Rates and Proportions, 2nd ed , 1981 .

[4]  Daron G Ferris,et al.  Colposcopy quality control by remote review of digitized colposcopic images. , 2004, American journal of obstetrics and gynecology.

[5]  Results of a randomized trial on the management of cytology interpretations of atypical squamous cells of undetermined significance. , 2003, American journal of obstetrics and gynecology.

[6]  S. Patni,et al.  A prospective follow up study of women with colposcopically unconfirmed positive cervical smears , 1999, British journal of obstetrics and gynaecology.

[7]  Mark Schiffman,et al.  Interobserver Agreement in the Evaluation of Digitized Cervical Images , 2007, Obstetrics and gynecology.

[8]  D. Ferris,et al.  Prediction of cervical histologic results using an abbreviated Reid Colposcopic Index during ALTS. , 2006, American journal of obstetrics and gynecology.

[9]  P. Walker,et al.  International Terminology of Colposcopy: An Updated Report From the International Federation for Cervical Pathology and Colposcopy , 2003, Obstetrics and gynecology.

[10]  Rodney Long,et al.  Preparing Digitized Cervigrams for Colposcopy Research and Education: Determination of Optimal Resolution and Compression Parameters , 2006, Journal of lower genital tract disease.

[11]  M Arbyn,et al.  Obstetric outcomes after conservative treatment for intraepithelial or early invasive cervical lesions: systematic review and meta-analysis , 2006, The Lancet.

[12]  R. Reid,et al.  Genital warts and cervical cancer. VII. An improved colposcopic index for differentiating benign papillomaviral infections from high-grade cervical intraepithelial neoplasia. , 1985, American journal of obstetrics and gynecology.

[13]  Sameer Antani,et al.  Digital Tools for Collecting Data from Cervigrams for Research and Training in Colposcopy , 2006, Journal of lower genital tract disease.

[14]  M. Schiffman,et al.  Postcolposcopy management strategies for women referred with low-grade squamous intraepithelial lesions or human papillomavirus DNA-positive atypical squamous cells of undetermined significance: a two-year prospective study. , 2003, American journal of obstetrics and gynecology.