Comparison of different methods for the estimation of aortic pulse wave velocity from 4D flow cardiovascular magnetic resonance

Table 4 Inter-observer reproducibility and effect of 20- vs. 50-time reconstructed frames temporal resolution

		Inter-observer reproducibility				Effect of temporal resolution
		Mean bias (m/s)	LA (m/s)	p	ICC	Mean bias (m/s)	LA (m/s)	p	ICC
S1	TTc	−0.50	[−2.6;1.6]	0.59	0.95	−1.62	[−11;8.1]	0.49	0.47
	TTw	0.46	[−5.2;6.1]	1.00	0.86	0.29	[−1;1.5]	0.50	0.91
	TTf	−0.46	[−3.4;2.4]	0.43	0.91	0.35	[−0.5;1.2]	0.50	0.93
S2	TTc	0.06	[−0.6;0.7]	0.84	0.99	−0.96	[−5.5;3.6]	0.54	0.75
	TTw	0.09	[−0.7;0.8]	0.80	0.99	0.15	[−0.5;0.8]	0.76	0.97
	TTf	−0.53	[−4.2;3.2]	0.38	0.61	0.15	[−0.6;0.9]	0.92	0.97
S3		0.18	[−0.9;1.2]	0.84	0.97	0.33	[−1.4;2]	0.68	0.82

Measures of repeatability of 4D flow MRI aoPWV estimates are provided: Bland-Altman mean biases and limits of agreement (LA) as well as intra class correlation coefficients (ICC). p values correspond to Wilcoxon rank-sum test of comparisons between aoPWV values obtained by the two observers and for the two reconstructions. S1, S2 and S3: Strategies 1, 2 and 3. TTc, TTw and TTf: transit times estimated using cross-correlation, wavelets and Fourier transforms, respectively

ISSN: 1532-429X