title: Intraobserver, interobserver, and intermethod agreement for results of myelography, computed tomography-myelography, and low-field magnetic resonance imaging in dogs with disk-associated wobbler syndrome.
abstract: OBJECTIVE
  To determine intraobserver, interobserver, and intermethod agreement for results of myelography, computed tomography-myelography (CTM), and low-field magnetic resonance imaging (MRI) in dogs with disk-associated wobbler syndrome (DAWS).
  
  
  METHODS
  Prospective cross-sectional study.
  
  
  METHODS
  22 dogs with DAWS.
  
  
  METHODS
  All dogs underwent myelography, CTM, and low-field MRI. Each imaging study was interpreted twice by 4 observers who were blinded to signalment and clinical information of the patients. The following variables were assessed by all 3 techniques: number, site, and direction of spinal cord compressions; narrowed intervertebral disk spaces; vertebral body abnormalities; spondylosis deformans; and abnormal articular facets. Intervertebral foraminal stenosis was assessed on CTM and MRI images. Intraobserver, interobserver, and intermethod agreement were calculated by κ and weighted κ statistics.
  
  
  RESULTS
  There was very good to good intraobserver agreement for most variables assessed by myelography and only moderate intraobserver agreement for most variables assessed by CTM and low-field MRI. There was moderate to fair interobserver and intermethod agreement for most variables assessed by the 3 diagnostic techniques. There was very good or good intraobserver, interobserver, or intermethod agreement for the site and direction of the worst spinal cord compression as assessed by all the imaging modalities; abnormal articular facets and intervertebral foraminal stenosis were the least reliably assessed variables, with poor interobserver agreement regardless of imaging modality used.
  
  
  CONCLUSIONS
  There was considerable variation in image interpretation among observers and between use of various imaging modalities; these imaging techniques should be considered complementary in assessment of dogs with DAWS.
authors.affiliation: Department of Small Animal Medicine and Clinical Biology, Faculty of Veterinary Medicine, Ghent University, 9820 Merelbeke, Belgium. sdedecker@rvc.ac.uk
authors.forename: Steven
authors.initials: S
authors.lastname: De Decker
authors.forename: Ingrid M V L
authors.initials: IM
authors.lastname: Gielen
authors.forename: Luc
authors.initials: L
authors.lastname: Duchateau
authors.forename: Nuria
authors.initials: N
authors.lastname: Corzo-Menéndez
authors.forename: Henri J J
authors.initials: HJ
authors.lastname: van Bree
authors.forename: Kaatje
authors.initials: K
authors.lastname: Kromhout
authors.forename: Tim
authors.initials: T
authors.lastname: Bosmans
authors.forename: Luc M L
authors.initials: LM
authors.lastname: Van Ham
mesh_terms: D000818:Animals; D002574:Cervical Vertebrae / Q000473:pathology; D003430:Cross-Sectional Studies; D004283:Dog Diseases / Q000000981:diagnostic imaging* / Q000473:pathology; D004285:Dogs; D007405:Intervertebral Disc Displacement / Q000000981:diagnostic imaging / Q000662:veterinary*; D008279:Magnetic Resonance Imaging / Q000662:veterinary*; D009192:Myelography / Q000379:methods / Q000662:veterinary*; D015588:Observer Variation; D013117:Spinal Cord Compression / Q000000981:diagnostic imaging / Q000662:veterinary*; D055009:Spondylosis / Q000473:pathology / Q000662:veterinary; D014057:Tomography, X-Ray Computed / Q000662:veterinary*