P1.221. Radiological Classification System for Anastomotic Leakage After Esophagectomy; ESO-RADS

Clicks: 14
ID: 326117
2026
Free PDF
Article Quality & Performance Metrics
Overall Quality
Not rated
Combines reader engagement with the AI quality analysis. This article has not been analysed, so there is no overall score — reader engagement is measured and shown alongside.
AI Quality Assessment
Not analyzed
Readership in this journal
Emerging

Ranked #445 of 453 articles by views in diseases of the esophagus : official journal of the international society for diseases of the esophagus

Most read Least read

Bar heights use a square-root scale. Only the 120 most-read articles are drawn; the journal has 453 in total.

Mint this article as an NFT
Not yet minted

Create a permanent, verifiable on-chain record of this article on the Scimatic Network. The NFT is held in your Journament account, and you can withdraw it to your own wallet at any time.

5 SUSD one-off · no wallet required
Sign in to mint
Abstract
Abstract Topic Esophageal Cancer: Surgical Treatment of Esophageal Cancer – early outcomes and complications Background Anastomotic leakage remains a major complication after esophagectomy and is associated with increased mortality and need for re-intervention. Although computed tomography is routinely used for diagnosis, a standardized CT-based assessment of anastomotic leakage severity is lacking; this study aimed to develop such scoring system. Methods Imaging features were selected through multidisciplinary consensus to develop a CT-based scoring system; ESO-RADS. All CT scans performed between January 1st 2022 and January 1st 2025 for suspected anastomotic leakage after esophagectomy were independently reviewed and scored by five radiologists blinded to the original reports. Interobserver agreement for probability scores of anastomotic leakage was assessed using the intraclass correlation coefficient (two-way random effects model, absolute agreement). Scans rated as inadequate (score 0) were excluded from this analysis. Results In total, 109 scans were re-assessed by five radiologists. Interobserver agreement among the five radiologists was reasonable, given the subjective nature of ordinal probability scoring, with an intraclass correlation coefficient (ICC) of 0.65 (95% CI 0.56–0.73). The AUC for detecting anastomotic leakage ranged from 0.72 to 0.85 among the five radiologists, reflecting good discriminative performance (Radiologist 1: 0.72 [95% CI 0.61–0.83]; Radiologist 2: 0.78 [0.68–0.87]; Radiologist 3: 0.85 [0.77–0.92]; Radiologist 4: 0.83 [0.75–0.91]; Radiologist 5: 0.77 [0.66–0.87]). The average score across all radiologists yielded an AUC of 0.83 (0.75–0.92). At a clinically relevant cut-off of ≥3 to indicate a positive result, individual radiologist performance showed moderate to high sensitivity (71–91%) and specificity (53–71%). Using the mean score, sensitivity and specificity improved to 80.0% and 77.8%, respectively. Conclusion The scoring system adds value in detecting anastomotic leakage on CT. Interobserver agreement among the five radiologists was acceptable and scoring allowed reliable discrimination between patients with and without leakage,. Averaging scores further improved sensitivity and specificity, supporting its use to enhance diagnostic consistency.
Reference Key
openalex_W7204010375 Use this key to autocite in the manuscript while using SciMatic Manuscript Manager or Thesis Manager
Authors Jasmijn Van Doesburg, Jorik Reimerink, Sabrine Kol, Thijs van Oudheusden, Joost Nederend, Roos Pauw, Wietse Eshuis, Suzanne Gisbertz, Mark van Berge Henegouwen, Danique Heuvelings, Bibi Martens, Freek Daams
Are you one of these authors? Claim your profile
Journal diseases of the esophagus : official journal of the international society for diseases of the esophagus
Year 2026
DOI
10.1093/dote/doag077.369
URL
https://academic.oup.com/dote/article-pdf/39/Supplement_1/doag077.369/70761032/doag077.369.pdf
Keywords Keywords not found

Citations

No citations found. To add a citation, contact the admin at info@scimatic.org

Comments

No comments yet. Be the first to comment on this article.