Reproducibility of abdominal aortic aneurysm diameter measurement and growth evaluation on axial and multiplanar computed tomography reformations
Article [Accepted Manuscript]
Is part of
CardioVascular and interventional radiology ; vol. 35, no. 4, pp. 779-787.Publisher(s)
SpringerAuthor(s)
Abstract(s)
Purpose: Compare different methods measuring abdominal aortic aneurysm (AAA)
maximal diameter (Dmax) and its progression on multi-detector computed tomography
scan (MDCT).
Materials and Methods: Forty AAA patients with 2 MDCT acquired at different time
(baseline and follow-up) were included. Three observers measured AAA diameters by 7
different methods: on axial images (antero-posterior, transverse, maximal and short axis)
and on multi-planar reformation (MPR) images (coronal, sagittal and orthogonal).
Diameter measurement and progression were compared over time for the 7 methods.
Reproducibility of measurement methods was assessed by intraclass correlation coefficient
(ICC) and Bland-Altman analysis.
Results: Dmax measured on axial slices at baseline and follow-up (FU) MDCTs was larger
than that measured with use of orthogonal method (p=0.00001), whereas Dmax with the
orthogonal method was larger than for all other measurement methods (p≤0.0001). The
highest inter-observer ICCs were obtained for the orthogonal and transverse method
(0.972) at baseline and for orthogonal and sagittal MPR at FU (0.973 and 0.977). Interobserver ICC of the orthogonal method to document AAA progression was higher
(ICC=0.833) than measurements taken on axial images (ICC=0.662-0.780) and single
plane MPRs (0.772-0.817).
Conclusion: AAA Dmax measured on MDCT axial slices overestimates aneurysm size.
Diameter measured by the orthogonal method is more reproducible, especially to document
AAA progression.
Other location(s)
Collections
This document disseminated on Papyrus is the exclusive property of the copyright holders and is protected by the Copyright Act (R.S.C. 1985, c. C-42). It may be used for fair dealing and non-commercial purposes, for private study or research, criticism and review as provided by law. For any other use, written authorization from the copyright holders is required.