19 Citations (Scopus)

Abstract

Purpose: To assess the agreement between three methods of calculation of mean aortic wall thickness (MAWT) using magnetic resonance imaging (MRI). Materials and Methods: High-resolution MRI of the infrarenal abdominal aorta was performed on 70 subjects with a history of coronary artery disease who were part of a multiethnic population-based sample. MAWTwas calculated as the mean distance between the adventitial and luminal aortic boundaries using three different methods: average distance at four standard positions (AWT-4P), average distance at 100 automated positions (AWT-100P), and using a mathematical computation derived from the total vessel and luminal areas (AWT-VA). Bland-Altman plots and Pass-ing-Bablok regression analyses were used to assess agreement between methods. Results: Bland-Altman analyses demonstrated a positive bias of 3.02 ± 7.31% between the AWT-VA and the AWT-4P methods, and of 1.76 ± 6.82% between the AWT-100P and the AWT-4P methods. Passing-Bablok regression analyses demonstrated constant bias between the AWT-4P method and the other two methods. Proportional bias was, however, not evident among the three methods. Conclusion: MRI methods of measurement of MAWT using a limited number of positions of the aortic wall systematically underestimate the MAWT value compared with the method that calculates MAWT from the vessel areas.

Original languageEnglish (US)
Pages (from-to)576-582
Number of pages7
JournalJournal of Magnetic Resonance Imaging
Volume29
Issue number3
DOIs
StatePublished - Mar 2009

Fingerprint

Magnetic Resonance Imaging
Regression Analysis
Adventitia
Abdominal Aorta
Coronary Artery Disease
Population

Keywords

  • Athero-sclerosis
  • Cardiovascular MRI
  • Wall thickness

ASJC Scopus subject areas

  • Radiology Nuclear Medicine and imaging

Cite this

Agreement between methods of measurement of mean aortic wall thickness by MRI. / Rosero, Eric B; Peshock, Ronald M; Khera, Amit; Clagett, G. Patrick; Lo, Hao; Timaran, Carlos H.

In: Journal of Magnetic Resonance Imaging, Vol. 29, No. 3, 03.2009, p. 576-582.

Research output: Contribution to journalArticle

@article{60c09d31933544b79ed2951185fd92d4,
title = "Agreement between methods of measurement of mean aortic wall thickness by MRI",
abstract = "Purpose: To assess the agreement between three methods of calculation of mean aortic wall thickness (MAWT) using magnetic resonance imaging (MRI). Materials and Methods: High-resolution MRI of the infrarenal abdominal aorta was performed on 70 subjects with a history of coronary artery disease who were part of a multiethnic population-based sample. MAWTwas calculated as the mean distance between the adventitial and luminal aortic boundaries using three different methods: average distance at four standard positions (AWT-4P), average distance at 100 automated positions (AWT-100P), and using a mathematical computation derived from the total vessel and luminal areas (AWT-VA). Bland-Altman plots and Pass-ing-Bablok regression analyses were used to assess agreement between methods. Results: Bland-Altman analyses demonstrated a positive bias of 3.02 ± 7.31{\%} between the AWT-VA and the AWT-4P methods, and of 1.76 ± 6.82{\%} between the AWT-100P and the AWT-4P methods. Passing-Bablok regression analyses demonstrated constant bias between the AWT-4P method and the other two methods. Proportional bias was, however, not evident among the three methods. Conclusion: MRI methods of measurement of MAWT using a limited number of positions of the aortic wall systematically underestimate the MAWT value compared with the method that calculates MAWT from the vessel areas.",
keywords = "Athero-sclerosis, Cardiovascular MRI, Wall thickness",
author = "Rosero, {Eric B} and Peshock, {Ronald M} and Amit Khera and Clagett, {G. Patrick} and Hao Lo and Timaran, {Carlos H}",
year = "2009",
month = "3",
doi = "10.1002/jmri.21697",
language = "English (US)",
volume = "29",
pages = "576--582",
journal = "Journal of Magnetic Resonance Imaging",
issn = "1053-1807",
publisher = "John Wiley and Sons Inc.",
number = "3",

}

TY - JOUR

T1 - Agreement between methods of measurement of mean aortic wall thickness by MRI

AU - Rosero, Eric B

AU - Peshock, Ronald M

AU - Khera, Amit

AU - Clagett, G. Patrick

AU - Lo, Hao

AU - Timaran, Carlos H

PY - 2009/3

Y1 - 2009/3

N2 - Purpose: To assess the agreement between three methods of calculation of mean aortic wall thickness (MAWT) using magnetic resonance imaging (MRI). Materials and Methods: High-resolution MRI of the infrarenal abdominal aorta was performed on 70 subjects with a history of coronary artery disease who were part of a multiethnic population-based sample. MAWTwas calculated as the mean distance between the adventitial and luminal aortic boundaries using three different methods: average distance at four standard positions (AWT-4P), average distance at 100 automated positions (AWT-100P), and using a mathematical computation derived from the total vessel and luminal areas (AWT-VA). Bland-Altman plots and Pass-ing-Bablok regression analyses were used to assess agreement between methods. Results: Bland-Altman analyses demonstrated a positive bias of 3.02 ± 7.31% between the AWT-VA and the AWT-4P methods, and of 1.76 ± 6.82% between the AWT-100P and the AWT-4P methods. Passing-Bablok regression analyses demonstrated constant bias between the AWT-4P method and the other two methods. Proportional bias was, however, not evident among the three methods. Conclusion: MRI methods of measurement of MAWT using a limited number of positions of the aortic wall systematically underestimate the MAWT value compared with the method that calculates MAWT from the vessel areas.

AB - Purpose: To assess the agreement between three methods of calculation of mean aortic wall thickness (MAWT) using magnetic resonance imaging (MRI). Materials and Methods: High-resolution MRI of the infrarenal abdominal aorta was performed on 70 subjects with a history of coronary artery disease who were part of a multiethnic population-based sample. MAWTwas calculated as the mean distance between the adventitial and luminal aortic boundaries using three different methods: average distance at four standard positions (AWT-4P), average distance at 100 automated positions (AWT-100P), and using a mathematical computation derived from the total vessel and luminal areas (AWT-VA). Bland-Altman plots and Pass-ing-Bablok regression analyses were used to assess agreement between methods. Results: Bland-Altman analyses demonstrated a positive bias of 3.02 ± 7.31% between the AWT-VA and the AWT-4P methods, and of 1.76 ± 6.82% between the AWT-100P and the AWT-4P methods. Passing-Bablok regression analyses demonstrated constant bias between the AWT-4P method and the other two methods. Proportional bias was, however, not evident among the three methods. Conclusion: MRI methods of measurement of MAWT using a limited number of positions of the aortic wall systematically underestimate the MAWT value compared with the method that calculates MAWT from the vessel areas.

KW - Athero-sclerosis

KW - Cardiovascular MRI

KW - Wall thickness

UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/record.url?scp=63449109587&partnerID=8YFLogxK

UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/citedby.url?scp=63449109587&partnerID=8YFLogxK

U2 - 10.1002/jmri.21697

DO - 10.1002/jmri.21697

M3 - Article

C2 - 19243039

AN - SCOPUS:63449109587

VL - 29

SP - 576

EP - 582

JO - Journal of Magnetic Resonance Imaging

JF - Journal of Magnetic Resonance Imaging

SN - 1053-1807

IS - 3

ER -