Skip to main content
Fig. 5 | Journal of Cardiovascular Magnetic Resonance

Fig. 5

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

Fig. 5

Comparisons among three different hematocrits (Hcts) and between two native blood T1. Bland–Altman plots indicate the minimal bias between Hct1 and Hct0 (a), between Hctsyn [conv] and Hct0 (c), and between Hctsyn [inline] and Hct0 (e). There is no statistical difference between Hct1 and Hct0 (b), between Hctsyn [conv] and Hct0 (d), and between Hctsyn [inline] and Hct0 (f). Bland–Altman plot indicates a 1.5 ms bias and confidence limit (7.2–6.9 ms) using the inline method compared with using the conventional method (g), which resulted in no statistical difference between the conventional and inline ECV methods for native blood T1 measurements (h). Hct0 is Hct obtained on the same day as theCMR. Hct1 is Hct obtained on a different day from the CMR. Hctsyn [conv] and Hctsyn [inline] are Hcts obtained synthetically from native blood T1mapping using the conventional and inline ECV methods, respectively

Back to article page