Skip to main content

Table 2 Comparison of aortic diameters as determined by 2D bSSFP and 3D CE-CMRA imaging

From: Non-contrast MR angiography at 1.5 Tesla for aortic monitoring in Marfan patients after aortic root surgery

2D bSSFP vs. 3D CE-CMRA Mid Graft Distal anastomosis Ascending aorta Aortic arch Descending aorta Diaphragm Coelic trunk
Mean diameter 2D bSSFP (mm) 32.9 29.1 31.7 27.9 28.0 26.4 25.8
Mean diameter 3D CE-CMRA (mm) 33.5 30.2 32.9 28.9 28.8 26.9 26.7
Mean difference (mm) −0.5 −1.1 −1.3 −1.0 −0.8 −0.6 −0.9
Limits of agreement (mm) −5.7 to 4.6 −7.1 to 4.9 −4.9 to 2.4 −7.1 to 5.0 −10.5 to 8.9 −5.2 to 4.0 −5.1 to 3.2
Standard deviation (mm) 2.6 3.0 1.9 3.1 4.9 2.3 2.1
Variance (mm2) 7.0 9.3 3.5 9.46 24.4 5.4 4.5
Pearson’s correlation (r) 0.75 0.66 0.89 0.74 0.79 0.96 0.96
P value (t-test) 0.005 0.009 0.011 0.011 0.042 <0.001 <0.001
  1. Comparison of aortic diameters as determined by 2D bSSFP and 3D CE-CMRA imaging as described by Bland and Altman. Provided measurements are the average of reader 1 and reader 2. Pearson’s correlation coefficient (r) for the different imaging modalities is indicated. Paired t-test was performed for comparison of mean diameters. Significant differences are in bold