57 Agreement in visual quality assessment of donated livers and kidneys among consultant surgeons

Abstract Introduction Surgeons' visual assessments represent the most common reason for non-utilisation of kidneys and livers retrieved for transplantation. While variability in organ acceptance between transplant centres is recognised, the influence of differences in subjective visual evaluations remains unclear. This study investigates inter-rater agreement amongst consultant transplant surgeons visually assessing organs for transplantation. Methods The study included 433 photographs (293 liver, 140 kidney), assessed by at least two transplant surgeons with over five years’ experience. Participants included eight surgeons from five centres for kidney photographs, and ten surgeons from six centres for liver photographs. Inter- and intra-rater agreements were determined with Gwet’s agreement coefficient (AC). Results There was excellent inter-rater agreement for liver steatosis across all levels (none/mild/moderate/severe), AC 0.81 (95%CI:0.76-0.86). Overall quality (good/moderate/poor) agreement was significantly lower in “good" vs “poor” quality livers, AC 0.86 (95%CI:0.75-0.97) vs AC 0.57 (95%CI:0.43-0.71), p<0.05. For kidney assessments, inter-rater agreement on global perfusion was excellent across all levels (good/fair/poor/patchy), AC 0.83 (95%CI:0.73-0.93). Agreement on overall quality was mixed, ranging from AC 0.94 (95%CI:0.73-1.00) for “good” kidneys, to AC 0.70 (95%CI:0.56-0.84) for “moderate” kidneys. Intra-rater agreement for both organs was consistently high (AC>0.86). Conclusions Despite excellent agreement among consultants on specific visual characteristics, there was a notable decrease in agreement when assessing overall quality. Clinicians concur on objective findings, but differ in how they weigh these observations when determining an organ's suitability for transplantation. These subjective differences may contribute to the variable organ acceptance rates across centres.

Authors

Institutions

Publication Details

Journal
British journal of surgery
Published
2025-03-01
DOI
https://doi.org/10.1093/bjs/znaf042.057
Primary Topic
Organ Donation and Transplantation
Type
article
Field-Weighted Citation Impact
0.00
Controls
|||
ALL TIME
JAN
FEB
MAR
APR
MAY
JUN
JUL
AUG
SEP
OCT
article

57 Agreement in visual quality assessment of donated livers and kidneys among consultant surgeons

Chris Callaghan, Avinash Sewpaul, James Hunter, Balaji Mahendran et al.
British journal of surgery
Organ Donation and Transplantation
article

57 Agreement in visual quality assessment of donated livers and kidneys among consultant surgeons

Chris Callaghan, Avinash Sewpaul, James Hunter, Balaji Mahendran, Christopher J.E. Watson, Ali Ahmed Elmahmudi, Aaron Ahearn, John Asher, Colin Wilson, Joerg‐Matthias Pollok, Brian Thomson, B. M. Stephenson, Samuel J Tingle, Seiji Yamaguchi, Jeroen de Jonge, Hassan Ugail, Georgios Kourounis, B. Dasari, Emily Thompson, Rodrigo Figueiredo
article en

Abstract

Abstract Introduction Surgeons' visual assessments represent the most common reason for non-utilisation of kidneys and livers retrieved for transplantation. While variability in organ acceptance between transplant centres is recognised, the influence of differences in subjective visual evaluations remains unclear. This study investigates inter-rater agreement amongst consultant transplant surgeons visually assessing organs for transplantation. Methods The study included 433 photographs (293 liver, 140 kidney), assessed by at least two transplant surgeons with over five years’ experience. Participants included eight surgeons from five centres for kidney photographs, and ten surgeons from six centres for liver photographs. Inter- and intra-rater agreements were determined with Gwet’s agreement coefficient (AC). Results There was excellent inter-rater agreement for liver steatosis across all levels (none/mild/moderate/severe), AC 0.81 (95%CI:0.76-0.86). Overall quality (good/moderate/poor) agreement was significantly lower in “good" vs “poor” quality livers, AC 0.86 (95%CI:0.75-0.97) vs AC 0.57 (95%CI:0.43-0.71), p<0.05. For kidney assessments, inter-rater agreement on global perfusion was excellent across all levels (good/fair/poor/patchy), AC 0.83 (95%CI:0.73-0.93). Agreement on overall quality was mixed, ranging from AC 0.94 (95%CI:0.73-1.00) for “good” kidneys, to AC 0.70 (95%CI:0.56-0.84) for “moderate” kidneys. Intra-rater agreement for both organs was consistently high (AC>0.86). Conclusions Despite excellent agreement among consultants on specific visual characteristics, there was a notable decrease in agreement when assessing overall quality. Clinicians concur on objective findings, but differ in how they weigh these observations when determining an organ's suitability for transplantation. These subjective differences may contribute to the variable organ acceptance rates across centres.

British journal of surgeryVol. 112(Supplement_6)
University of Southern California (US), Guy's Hospital (GB), NHS Blood and Transplant (GB), University of Bradford (GB), University of California, San Francisco (US), Queen Elizabeth Hospital Birmingham (GB), NHS Greater Glasgow and Clyde (GB), The Royal Free Hospital (GB), Freeman Hospital (GB), Erasmus MC (NL), Edinburgh Royal Infirmary (GB), University of Oxford (GB), Addenbrooke's Hospital (GB), University College London (GB), University of Newcastle Australia (AU), Newcastle University (GB), Erasmus University Rotterdam (NL)
No poverty
Openalex Percentile: Top 93%
Organ Donation and Transplantation
AI Navigator

Ask Laika to Summarize, Analyze, and Connect papers live on the map.

Summarize Papers & Methodologies

Extract key findings, datasets, and comparative methods across publications.

Benchmark Rankings & Visual Analytics

Rank top research institutions, authors, funders, topics, and journals by Field-Weighted Citation Impact (FWCI) and paper volume with instant charts.

Connect Distant Disciplines

Bridge topological clusters on the map to find hidden collaborative intersections.