Skip to main content

Table 5 Comparison between different methods of measuring centreline length

From: Aortic length measurements for pulse wave velocity calculation: manual 2D vs automated 3D centreline extraction

 

Difference length (mm)

Difference PWV (mean ± std, %)

Absolute Difference PWV (mean ± std, %)

2D–3D

  HATS-1**

7.4 [2.4–11.6]

0.26 [0.08–0.48], 3.0 [1.1–4.9]%

0.28 [0.17–0.50], 3.3 [2.3–4.9]%

  HATS-2*

−6.9 [−8.8–0.3]

−0.26 [−0.35–0.02], −2.7 [−4.1–0.2]%

0.26 [0.16–0.35], 3.2 [1.8–4.1]%

  CoA bSSFP**

−6.3 [-10.8 – −2.1]

−0.13 [−0.22 – −0.04], −3.1 [−4.5 – −1.0]%

0.13 [0.05–0.22], 3.1 [1.1–4.5]%

  CoA CE-MRA

−4.0 [−13.5–6.5]

−0.07 [−0.24–0.11], −1.6 [−4.9–2.6]%

0.18 [0.11–0.38], 3.7 [2.5–7.5]%

ED-ES**

−1.5 [−3.2 – −1.3]

−0.08 [−0.10 – −0.04], −0.6 [−1.4 – −0.5]%

0.08 [0.04–0.10], 0.6 [0.5–1.4]%

bSSFP-CE-MRA

7.8 [−8.1–14.4]

0.14 [−0.13–0.25], 2.9 [−3.6–5.4]%

0.22 [0.13–0.30], 4.2 [3.4–6.7]%

  1. 2D manual minus 3D semi-automatic length, end-diastolic (ED) minus end-systolic (ES) length, and length from bSSFP minus CE-MRA (*= p ≤ 0.05, **= p ≤ 0.01, calculated for the PWV difference). ‘Difference length’ and ‘Difference PWV’ indicate whether a bias is present, whereas ‘absolute difference PWV’ indicates the average difference between the methods, disregarding a bias between the two. All results are provided as median [IQR]