Skip to main content
Fig. 4 | Journal of Cardiovascular Magnetic Resonance

Fig. 4

From: Is a timely assessment of the hematocrit necessary for cardiovascular magnetic resonance–derived extracellular volume measurements?

Fig. 4

Correlation and comparisons among three extracellular volumes (ECVs) derived from three different hematocrits (Hcts) using the conventional ECV and the inline ECV methods. ECV1 and ECVsyn are both strongly correlated with ECV0 in the conventional method (a) and the inline ECV method (b). In the conventional method, Bland–Altman plots indicate minimal bias between ECV1 and ECV0 (c) and between ECVsyn and ECV0 (e). Similarly, Bland–Altman plots also indicate minimal bias between ECV1 and ECV0 (d) and between ECVsyn and ECV0 (f) in inline ECV method. No significant differences among 3 ECVs in the conventional method (g) and the inline ECV method (h) were observed. ECV0 is derived using an Hct obtained on the day of CMR (CMR; Hct0), ECV1 is derived with Hct1 is measured from a different day than CMR, and ECVsyn is derived with Hctsyn, which is calculated from native blood T1 mapping

Back to article page