Abdominal aortic aneurysm diameter: a comparison of ultrasound measurements with those from standard and three-dimensional computed tomography reconstruction.

Manning, Brian J; Kristmundsson, Thorarinn; Sonesson, Björn; Resch, Timothy

Abdominal aortic aneurysm diameter: a comparison of ultrasound measurements with those from standard and three-dimensional computed tomography reconstruction.

Mark

Manning, Brian J ; Kristmundsson, Thorarinn ; Sonesson, Björn ^LU and Resch, Timothy (2009) In Journal of vascular surgery : official publication, the Society for Vascular Surgery [and] International Society for Cardiovascular Surgery, North American Chapter 50(2). p.263-268

Abstract: OBJECTIVE: Aortic aneurysm size is a critical determinant of the need for intervention, yet the maximal diameter will often vary depending on the modality and method of measurement. We aimed to define the relationship between commonly used computed tomography (CT) measurement techniques and those based on current reporting standards and to compare the values obtained with diameter measured using ultrasound (US). METHODS: CT scans from patients with US-detected aneurysms were analyzed using three-dimensional reconstruction software. Maximal aortic diameter was recorded in the anteroposterior (CT-AP) plane, along the maximal ellipse (CT-ME), perpendicular to the maximal ellipse (CT-PME), or perpendicular to the centerline of flow (CT-PCLF).... (More); OBJECTIVE: Aortic aneurysm size is a critical determinant of the need for intervention, yet the maximal diameter will often vary depending on the modality and method of measurement. We aimed to define the relationship between commonly used computed tomography (CT) measurement techniques and those based on current reporting standards and to compare the values obtained with diameter measured using ultrasound (US). METHODS: CT scans from patients with US-detected aneurysms were analyzed using three-dimensional reconstruction software. Maximal aortic diameter was recorded in the anteroposterior (CT-AP) plane, along the maximal ellipse (CT-ME), perpendicular to the maximal ellipse (CT-PME), or perpendicular to the centerline of flow (CT-PCLF). Diameter measurements were compared with each other and with maximal AP diameter according to US (US-AP). Analysis was performed according to the principles of Bland and Altman. Results are expressed as mean +/- standard deviation. RESULTS: CT and US scans from 109 patients (92 men, 17 women), with a mean age of 72 +/- 8 years, were included. The mean of each series of readings on CT was significantly larger than the mean US-AP measurement (P < .001), and they also differed significantly from each other (P < .001). The CT-PCLF diameter was larger than CT-AP and CT-PME by mean values of 3.0 +/- 6.6 and 5.9 +/- 6.0 mm, respectively. The CT-ME diameter was larger than CT-PCLF by a mean of 2.4 +/- 5 mm. The US-AP diameter was smaller than CT-AP diameter by 4.2 +/- 4.9 mm, CT-ME by 9.6 +/- 8.0 mm, CT-PME by 1.3 +/- 5 mm, and smaller than CT-PCLF by 7.3 +/- 7.0 mm. Aneurysm size did not significantly affect these differences. Seventy-eight percent of 120 pairs of intraobserver CT measurements and 65% of interobserver CT measurements differed by <2 mm. CONCLUSIONS: CT-based measurements of aneurysm size tend to be larger than the US-AP measurement. CT-PCLF diameters are consistently larger than CT-PME as well as CT-AP measurements. These differences should be considered when applying evidence from previous trials to clinical decisions. (Less)

Please use this url to cite or link to this publication: https://lup.lub.lu.se/record/1452791

author

Manning, Brian J ; Kristmundsson, Thorarinn ; Sonesson, Björn ^LU and Resch, Timothy

organization

Department of Clinical Sciences, Malmö

publishing date

2009

type

Contribution to journal

publication status

published

subject

Clinical Medicine

in

Journal of vascular surgery : official publication, the Society for Vascular Surgery [and] International Society for Cardiovascular Surgery, North American Chapter

volume

50

issue

2

pages

263 - 268

publisher

Mosby-Elsevier

external identifiers

wos:000268610000004
pmid:19631858
scopus:67650963861

ISSN

1097-6809

DOI

10.1016/j.jvs.2009.02.243

language

English

LU publication?

yes

additional info

The information about affiliations in this record was updated in December 2015. The record was previously connected to the following departments: Emergency medicine/Medicine/Surgery (013240200)

id

3c4a8513-34f7-4b6b-98f5-98412d07ebd6 (old id 1452791)

alternative location

http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/19631858?dopt=Abstract

date added to LUP

2016-04-04 09:20:01

date last changed

2022-01-29 17:22:19

@article{3c4a8513-34f7-4b6b-98f5-98412d07ebd6,
  abstract     = {{OBJECTIVE: Aortic aneurysm size is a critical determinant of the need for intervention, yet the maximal diameter will often vary depending on the modality and method of measurement. We aimed to define the relationship between commonly used computed tomography (CT) measurement techniques and those based on current reporting standards and to compare the values obtained with diameter measured using ultrasound (US). METHODS: CT scans from patients with US-detected aneurysms were analyzed using three-dimensional reconstruction software. Maximal aortic diameter was recorded in the anteroposterior (CT-AP) plane, along the maximal ellipse (CT-ME), perpendicular to the maximal ellipse (CT-PME), or perpendicular to the centerline of flow (CT-PCLF). Diameter measurements were compared with each other and with maximal AP diameter according to US (US-AP). Analysis was performed according to the principles of Bland and Altman. Results are expressed as mean +/- standard deviation. RESULTS: CT and US scans from 109 patients (92 men, 17 women), with a mean age of 72 +/- 8 years, were included. The mean of each series of readings on CT was significantly larger than the mean US-AP measurement (P &lt; .001), and they also differed significantly from each other (P &lt; .001). The CT-PCLF diameter was larger than CT-AP and CT-PME by mean values of 3.0 +/- 6.6 and 5.9 +/- 6.0 mm, respectively. The CT-ME diameter was larger than CT-PCLF by a mean of 2.4 +/- 5 mm. The US-AP diameter was smaller than CT-AP diameter by 4.2 +/- 4.9 mm, CT-ME by 9.6 +/- 8.0 mm, CT-PME by 1.3 +/- 5 mm, and smaller than CT-PCLF by 7.3 +/- 7.0 mm. Aneurysm size did not significantly affect these differences. Seventy-eight percent of 120 pairs of intraobserver CT measurements and 65% of interobserver CT measurements differed by &lt;2 mm. CONCLUSIONS: CT-based measurements of aneurysm size tend to be larger than the US-AP measurement. CT-PCLF diameters are consistently larger than CT-PME as well as CT-AP measurements. These differences should be considered when applying evidence from previous trials to clinical decisions.}},
  author       = {{Manning, Brian J and Kristmundsson, Thorarinn and Sonesson, Björn and Resch, Timothy}},
  issn         = {{1097-6809}},
  language     = {{eng}},
  number       = {{2}},
  pages        = {{263--268}},
  publisher    = {{Mosby-Elsevier}},
  series       = {{Journal of vascular surgery : official publication, the Society for Vascular Surgery [and] International Society for Cardiovascular Surgery, North American Chapter}},
  title        = {{Abdominal aortic aneurysm diameter: a comparison of ultrasound measurements with those from standard and three-dimensional computed tomography reconstruction.}},
  url          = {{http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.jvs.2009.02.243}},
  doi          = {{10.1016/j.jvs.2009.02.243}},
  volume       = {{50}},
  year         = {{2009}},
}

Lund University Publications

LUND UNIVERSITY LIBRARIES

Abdominal aortic aneurysm diameter: a comparison of ultrasound measurements with those from standard and three-dimensional computed tomography reconstruction.