Skip to main content

Table 3 Comparison of regurgitant fraction (RF) measured by the indirect and direct methods

From: Direct measurement of atrioventricular valve regurgitant jets using 4D flow cardiovascular magnetic resonance is accurate and reliable for children with congenital heart disease: a retrospective cohort study

 Spearman (ρ)WSRTMedian difference (IQR)Absolute Median difference (IQR)
VOL vs. AIMstatρ = 0.69p = 0.0274.34% (− 2.02–15.73)8.97% (4.07–21.94)
VOL vs. AIMtrackρ = 0.70p = 0.0066.87% (0.24–14.97)11.70% (4.80–23.69)
VOL vs. JETρ = 0.73p = 0.624−1.49% (− 8.34–7.21)8.24% (3.90–14.98)
AIMstatvs. AIMtrackρ = 0.98p < 0.0011.67% (0.12–4.27)1.88% (1.19–4.27)
AIMstatvs. JETρ = 0.80p = 0.005−3.57% (− 12.03–1.75)7.52% (2.25–13.45)
AIMtrackvs. JETρ = 0.80p < 0.001−5.80% (− 13.65 – − 0.32)7.40% (3.11–13.65)
  1. Differences are calculated in the order presented (ex: VOL vs. JET = VOL-JET). VOL Volumetry method, AIMstat Annular inflow method by static plane, AIMtrack Annular inflow method by valve-tracking plane, JET Direct measurement of the atrioventricular regurgitant jet, IQR Interquartile range, WSRT Wilcoxon signed rank test