Skip to main content

Table 3 Regurgitation reclassification comparing no and stationary tissue correction methods to phantom correction

From: The clinical impact of phase offset errors and different correction methods in cardiovascular magnetic resonance phase contrast imaging: a multi-scanner study

 

Aortic valve (n = 175)

Pulmonary valve (n = 171)

≥1 categorya

1 categoryb

≥2 categoriesc

Weighted kappa

95% CI

≥1 categorya

1 categoryb

≥2 categoriesc

Weighted kappa

95% CI

Medis QFlow

 No correction

21 (12%)

19 (11%)

2 (1%)

0.69

0.55–0.83

16 (9%)

15 (9%)

1 (1%)

0.92

0.88–0.96

 1st order correction

36 (21%)

31 (18%)

5 (3%)

0.55

0.40–0.69

19 (11%)

18 (11%)

1 (1%)

0.90

0.86–0.94

MASS

 No correction

21 (12%)

20 (11%)

1 (1%)

0.73

0.61–0.85

15 (9%)

14 (8%)

1 (1%)

0.92

0.88–0.96

 Optimized ST correction

22 (13%)

19 (11%)

3 (2%)

0.69

0.55–0.83

18 (11%)

18 (11%)

0 (0%)

0.91

0.88–0.95

 1st order correction

28 (16%)

22 (13%)

6 (3%)

0.62

0.49–0.76

22 (13%)

22 (13%)

0 (0%)

0.89

0.85–0.93

 2nd order correction

24 (14%)

19 (11%)

5 (3%)

0.60

0.43–0.76

23 (13%)

23 (13%)

0 (0%)

0.89

0.85–0.93

 3rd order correction

18 (10%)

15 (9%)

3 (2%)

0.73

0.59–0.87

23 (13%)

23 (13%)

0 (0%)

0.89

0.85–0.93

Circle cvi42

 No correction

29 (17%)

27 (15%)

2 (1%)

0.64

0.51–0.78

15 (9%)

14 (8%)

1 (1%)

0.92

0.88–0.96

 Optimized ST correction

32 (18%)

27 (15%)

5 (3%)

0.61

0.48–0.74

35 (20%)

34 (20%)

1 (1%)

0.83

0.77–0.88

 1st order correction

64 (37%)

55 (31%)

9 (5%)

0.41

0.28–0.53

26 (15%)

25 (15%)

1 (1%)

0.87

0.82–0.92

 2nd order correction

24 (14%)

20 (11%)

4 (2%)

0.65

0.51–0.79

34 (20%)

32 (19%)

2 (1%)

0.83

0.77–0.88

 3rd order correction

27 (15%)

23 (13%)

4 (2%)

0.63

0.50–0.77

31 (18%)

28 (16%)

3 (2%)

0.84

0.78–0.89

  1. Values are presented as number (percentage)
  2. CI Confidence interval, ST Stationary tissue
  3. a indicates number of studies in which regurgitation severity is reclassified with the different correction methods (no, 1st, 2nd or 3rd order) compared to phantom corrected measurements; b number of studies in which regurgitation severity shifted only one category (e.g. from mild to moderate). c number of studies in which regurgitation severity shifted with two categories or more (e.g. from none to moderate or mild to severe)