Skip to main content

Table 2 Comparison between the 2D and 3D torsion curves, top values: T2D as 2D method, bottom values: T*2D as 2D method.

From: Comparison of 2D and 3D calculation of left ventricular torsion as circumferential-longitudinal shear angle using cardiovascular magnetic resonance tagging

 

Average values

(3D vs. 2D) (deg)

Regression line

(3D vs. 2D)

Correlation coefficient (Difference vs. Average)

Limits of agreement regression line (top) (Difference vs. Average), Limits of agreement (bottom) (Difference)

Base-apex

2.9 ± 1.9 vs. 3.4 ± 2.3

y = 0.77*x + 0.21

r = 0.67

y = 0.23*x - 0.15 ± 1.01

 

2.9 ± 1.9 vs. 2.9 ± 2.1

y = 0.86*x + 0.38

r = 0.39

0.03 ± 1.14

Base-mid

2.9 ± 1.9 vs. 3.7 ± 2.6

y = 0.70*x + 0.32

r = 0.71

y = 0.32*x - 0.23 ± 1.37

 

2.9 ± 1.9 vs. 3.4 ± 2.4

y = 0.75*x + 0.32

r = 0.56

0.51 ± 1.71

Mid-apex

2.8 ± 1.8 vs. 3.5 ± 2.4

y = 0.71*x + 0.31

r = 0.69

y = 0.30*x - 0.23 ± 1.31

 

2.8 ± 1.8 vs. 2.4 ± 2.0

y = 0.82*x + 0.81

r = 0.26

-0.39 ± 1.61