...
首页> 外文期刊>BMC Medical Imaging >Comparison of two different measurement methods in evaluating basilar atherosclerotic plaque using high-resolution MRI at 3?tesla
【24h】

Comparison of two different measurement methods in evaluating basilar atherosclerotic plaque using high-resolution MRI at 3?tesla

机译:3种特斯拉高分辨率MRI评估基底动脉粥样硬化斑块的两种不同测量方法的比较

获取原文
           

摘要

To compare the Self-referenced and Referenced measurement methods in assessing basilar artery (BA) atherosclerotic plaque employing dark blood high-resolution MRI at 3?Tesla. Forty patients with ?20% stenosis as identified by conventional MRA were recruited and evaluated on a 3?Tesla MRI system. The outer wall, inner wall and lumen areas of maximal lumen narrowing site and the outer wall and lumen areas of sites that were proximal and distal to the maximal lumen narrowing site were manually traced. Plaque area (PA), stenosis rate (SR) and percent plaque burden (PPB) were calculated using the Self-referenced and Referenced measurement methods, respectively. To assess intra-observer reproducibility, BA plaque was measured twice with a 2-week interval in between measurements. Thirty-seven patients were included in the final analysis. There were no significant differences in PA, SR and PPB measurements between the two methods. The intra-class coefficients and coefficient of variations (CV) ranged from 0.976 to 0.990 and from 3.73 to 5.61% for the Self-referenced method and ranged from 0.928 to 0.971 and from 4.64 to 9.95% for the Referenced method, respectively. Both methods are effective in the evaluation of BA plaque. However, the CVs of the Self-referenced method is lower than the Referenced measurement method. Moreover, Bland-Altman plots showed that the Self-referenced method has a narrower interval than the Referenced measurement method. The Self-referenced method is better and more convenient for evaluating BA plaque, and it may serve as a promising method for evaluation of basilar atherosclerotic plaque.
机译:为了比较自参考和参考测量方法在3?Tesla上使用暗血高分辨率MRI评估基底动脉(BA)动脉粥样硬化斑块的方法。募集了40例通过常规MRA识别出的狭窄度≥20%的患者,并在3特斯拉MRI系统上进行了评估。手动追踪最大管腔变窄部位的外壁,内壁和管腔区域以及最大管腔变窄部位的近端和远端的部位的外壁和管腔面积。分别使用自参考和参考测量方法计算斑面积(PA),狭窄率(SR)和斑负荷百分比(PPB)。为了评估观察者内部的可重复性,两次测量BA斑块,两次测量之间间隔2周。最终分析中包括37例患者。两种方法在PA,SR和PPB测量方面没有显着差异。对于自参考方法,组内系数和变异系数(CV)的范围分别为0.976至0.990和3.73至5.61%,对于参考方法,其类别范围内的变异系数(CV)分别为0.928至0.971和4.64至9.95%。两种方法均能有效评估BA斑块。但是,自参考方法的CV低于参考测量方法。此外,Bland-Altman图显示自参考方法的间隔比参考测量方法的间隔窄。自参照法是评价BA斑块的更好,更方便的方法,可作为评价基底动脉粥样硬化斑块的有前途的方法。

著录项

相似文献

  • 外文文献
  • 中文文献
  • 专利
获取原文

客服邮箱:kefu@zhangqiaokeyan.com

京公网安备:11010802029741号 ICP备案号:京ICP备15016152号-6 六维联合信息科技 (北京) 有限公司©版权所有
  • 客服微信

  • 服务号