Background and aim: Few studies have specifically addressed interobserver agreement in describing lesions identified during capsule endoscopy. The aim of our study is to evaluate interobserver agreement in the description of capsule endoscopy findings.
Materials and methods: Consecutive short segments of capsule endoscopy were prospectively observed by 8 investigators. Seventy-five videos were prepared by an external investigator (gold standard). The description of the findings was reported by the investigators using the same validated and standardized capsule endoscopy structured terminology. The agreement was assessed using Cohen's kappa statistic.
Results: As concerns the ability to detect a lesion, the agreement with the gold standard was moderate (kappa 0.48), as well as the agreement relating to the final diagnosis (κ 0.45). The best agreement was observed in identifying the presence of active bleeding (κ 0.72), whereas the poorest agreement concerned the lesion size (κ 0.32). The agreement with the GS was significantly better in endoscopists with higher case/volume of capsule endoscopy per year. Diagnostic concordance was better in the presence of angiectasia than in the presence of polyps or ulcers/erosions.
Conclusions: Correct lesion identification and diagnosis seem more likely to occur in presence of angiectasia, and for readers with more experience in capsule endoscopy reading.
Published by Elsevier Ltd.