Introduction: The Revised Organ Injury Scale (OIS) of the American Association for Surgery of Trauma (AAST) is the most widely accepted classification of splenic trauma. The objective of this study was to evaluate inter-rater agreement for CT grading of blunt splenic injuries. Methods: CT scans in adult patients with splenic injuries at a level 1 trauma centre were independently graded by 5 fellowship trained abdominal radiologists using the AAST OIS for splenic injuries – 2018 revision. The inter-rater agreement for AAST CT injury score, as well as low-grade (IIII) versus high-grade (IV-V) splenic injury was assessed. Disagreement in two key clinical scenarios (no injury versus injury, and high versus low grade) were qualitatively reviewed to identify possible sources of disagreement. Results: A total of 610 examinations were included. The inter-rater absolute agreement was low (Fleiss kappa statistic 0.38, P < 0.001), but improved when comparing agreement between low and high grade injuries (Fleiss kappa statistic of 0.77, P < .001). There were 34 cases (5.6%) of minimum two-rater disagreement about no injury vs injury (AAST grade ≥ I). There were 46 cases (7.5%) of minimum two-rater disagreement of low grade (AAST grade I-III) versus high grade (AAST grade IV-V) injuries. Likely sources of disagreement were interpretation of clefts versus lacerations, peri-splenic fluid versus subcapsular hematoma, application of adding multiple low grade injuries to higher grade injuries, and identification of subtle vascular injuries. Conclusion: There is low absolute agreement in grading of splenic injuries using the existing AAST OIS for splenic injuries.

Purpose: The development and evaluation of machine learning models that automatically identify the body part(s) imaged, axis of imaging, and the presence of intravenous contrast material of a CT series of images. Methods: This retrospective study included 6955 series from 1198 studies (501 female, 697 males, mean age 56.5 years) obtained between January 2010 and September 2021. Each series was annotated by a trained board-certified radiologist with labels consisting of 16 body parts, 3 imaging axes, and whether an intravenous contrast agent was used. The studies were randomly assigned to the training, validation and testing sets with a proportion of 70%, 20% and 10%, respectively, to develop a 3D deep neural network for each classification task. External validation was conducted with a total of 35,272 series from 7 publicly available datasets. The classification accuracy for each series was independently assessed for each task to evaluate model performance. Results: The accuracies for identifying the body parts, imaging axes, and the presence of intravenous contrast were 96.0% (95% CI: 94.6%, 97.2%), 99.2% (95% CI: 98.5%, 99.7%), and 97.5% (95% CI: 96.4%, 98.5%) respectively. The generalizability of the models was demonstrated through external validation with accuracies of 89.7 - 97.8%, 98.6 - 100%, and 87.8 - 98.6% for the same tasks. Conclusions: The developed models demonstrated high performance on both internal and external testing in identifying key aspects of a CT series.

No abstract