Table 3.
Rectal cancer nodal morphological and enhancement characteristics on MR images versus histopathological findings in 440 nodes
| Radiologist | Radiologist 1 | Radiologist 2 | κ | ||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Histopathologic Findings | Benign (330) | Malignant (111) | P | Benign (330) | Malignant (111) | P | |
| Border | < 0.001 | < 0.001 | 0.633 | ||||
| Smooth | 319 (96.7%) | 29 (26.1%) | 305 (92.4%) | 33 (29.7%) | |||
| Irregular | 11 (3.3%) | 82 (73.9%) | 25 (7.6%) | 78 (70.3%) | |||
| Signal homogeneity | < 0.001 | < 0.001 | 0.611 | ||||
| Homogenous | 230 (69.7%) | 8 (7.2%) | 225 (68.2%) | 11 (9.9%) | |||
| Mild-heterogeneous | 99 (30.0%) | 46 (41.4%) | 104 (31.5%) | 59 (53.2%) | |||
| Obvious-heterogeneous | 1 (0.3%) | 57 (51.4%) | 1 (0.3%) | 41 (36.9%) | |||
| Enhancement degree | < 0.001 | < 0.001 | 0.703 | ||||
| Obvious | 277 (83.9%) | 12 (10.8%) | 287 (87.0%) | 12 (10.8%) | |||
| Intermediate | 46 (13.9%) | 57 (51.4%) | 32 (9.7%) | 55 (49.5%) | |||
| Mild | 7 (2.1%) | 42 (37.8%) | 11 (3.3%) | 44 (39.6%) | |||
| Enhancement homogeneity | < 0.001 | < 0.001 | 0.747 | ||||
| Homogeneous | 223 (67.6%) | 5 (4.5%) | 210 (63.6%) | 2 (1.8%) | |||
| Mild-heterogeneous | 96 (29.1%) | 12 (10.8%) | 102 (30.9%) | 14 (12.6%) | |||
| Obvious-heterogenous | 2 (0.6%) | 36 (32.4%) | 3 (0.9%) | 42 (37.8%) | |||
| Rim-like | 9 (2.7%) | 58 (52.3%) | 15 (4.5%) | 53 (47.7%) | |||