| |  Online-Ressource |
|---|
| Verfasst von: | Müller-Eschner, Matthias [VerfasserIn]  |
|---|
| | Rengier, Fabian [VerfasserIn] |
|---|
| | Partovi, Sasan [VerfasserIn] |
|---|
| | Weber, Tim [VerfasserIn] |
|---|
| | Kopp-Schneider, Annette [VerfasserIn] |
|---|
| | Geisbüsch, Philipp [VerfasserIn] |
|---|
| | Kauczor, Hans-Ulrich [VerfasserIn] |
|---|
| | Tengg-Kobligk, Hendrik von [VerfasserIn] |
|---|
| Titel: | Accuracy and variability of semiautomatic centerline analysis versus manual aortic measurement techniques for TEVAR |
|---|
| Verf.angabe: | M. Müller-Eschner, F. Rengier, S. Partovi, T.F. Weber, A. Kopp-Schneider, P. Geisbüsch, H.-U. Kauczor, H. von Tengg-Kobligk |
|---|
| E-Jahr: | 2013 |
|---|
| Jahr: | 11 January 2013 |
|---|
| Umfang: | 7 S. |
|---|
| Fussnoten: | Gesehen am 22.06.2021 |
|---|
| Titel Quelle: | Enthalten in: European journal of vascular and endovascular surgery |
|---|
| Ort Quelle: | New York, NY : Elsevier, 1995 |
|---|
| Jahr Quelle: | 2013 |
|---|
| Band/Heft Quelle: | 45(2013), 3, Seite 241-247 |
|---|
| ISSN Quelle: | 1532-2165 |
|---|
| Abstract: | Objectives - This study aims to test whether inter-observer variability and time of diameter measurements for thoracic endovascular aortic repair (TEVAR) are improved by semiautomatic centerline analysis compared to manual assessment. - Methods - Preoperative computed tomography (CT) angiographies of 30 patients with thoracic aortic disease (mean age 66.8 ± 11.6 years, 23 males) were retrospectively analysed by two blinded experts in vascular radiology. Maximum aortic diameters at three positions relevant to TEVAR were assessed (P1, distal to left common carotid artery; P2, distal to left subclavian artery; and P3, proximal to coeliac trunk) using three measurement techniques: manual axial slices (axial), manual double-oblique multiplanar reformations (MPRs) and semiautomatic centerline analysis. - Results - Diameter measurements by both centerline analysis and the axial technique did not significantly differ from MPR (p = 0.17 and p = 0.37). Total deviation index for 0.9 was for P1 2.7 mm (axial), 3.7 mm (MPR), 1.8 mm (centerline); for P2 2.0 mm (axial), 3.6 mm (MPR), 1.8 mm (centerline); and for P3 3.0 mm (axial), 3.5 mm (MPR), 2.5 mm (centerline). Measurement time using centerline analysis was significantly shorter than for assessment by MPR. - Conclusions - Centerline analysis provides the least variable and fast diameter measurements in TEVAR patients with the same accuracy as the current reference standard MPR. |
|---|
| DOI: | doi:10.1016/j.ejvs.2012.12.003 |
|---|
| URL: | Bitte beachten Sie: Dies ist ein Bibliographieeintrag. Ein Volltextzugriff für Mitglieder der Universität besteht hier nur, falls für die entsprechende Zeitschrift/den entsprechenden Sammelband ein Abonnement besteht oder es sich um einen OpenAccess-Titel handelt.
Volltext: https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ejvs.2012.12.003 |
|---|
| | Volltext: https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S1078588412007964 |
|---|
| | DOI: https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ejvs.2012.12.003 |
|---|
| Datenträger: | Online-Ressource |
|---|
| Sprache: | eng |
|---|
| Sach-SW: | Computed tomography |
|---|
| | Computer-assisted image analysis |
|---|
| | Endovascular |
|---|
| | Thoracic aorta |
|---|
| | Three-dimensional imaging |
|---|
| K10plus-PPN: | 1761035800 |
|---|
| Verknüpfungen: | → Zeitschrift |
|---|
Accuracy and variability of semiautomatic centerline analysis versus manual aortic measurement techniques for TEVAR / Müller-Eschner, Matthias [VerfasserIn]; 11 January 2013 (Online-Ressource)
