OBJECTIVES: The aim of this study was to estimate the agreement between ultrasonography (US) and computed tomography (CT) in the measurement of aortic diameter in subjects with and without abdominal aortic aneurysms (AAA). MATERIAL AND METHODS: Sixty-one subjects were investigated, 33 with a diameter >30mm and 28 with a diameter <30mm. Difference and variabily anteroposterior (AP) and transverse (TR) diameters were analysed. RESULTS: In non-aneurysmal aortas US gave larger AP: 2.8mm (95% CI 1.7-4.0) and TR: 3.8mm (2.3-5.3) diameter. In AAAs the mean diameter did not differ significantly. In non-aneurysmal aortas we expect 95% of differences to be <5.7mm in AP and <7.6mm in TR measurements. In aneurysmal aortas we expect 95% of differences to be <8.0mm in AP and <10.6mm in TR measurements. CONCLUSION: The difference and variability between US and CT varies depends on the diameter of the aorta and how it is measured. These differences have importance for clinical practice and for research.
OBJECTIVES: The aim of this study was to estimate the agreement between ultrasonography (US) and computed tomography (CT) in the measurement of aortic diameter in subjects with and without abdominal aortic aneurysms (AAA). MATERIAL AND METHODS: Sixty-one subjects were investigated, 33 with a diameter >30mm and 28 with a diameter <30mm. Difference and variabily anteroposterior (AP) and transverse (TR) diameters were analysed. RESULTS: In non-aneurysmal aortas US gave larger AP: 2.8mm (95% CI 1.7-4.0) and TR: 3.8mm (2.3-5.3) diameter. In AAAs the mean diameter did not differ significantly. In non-aneurysmal aortas we expect 95% of differences to be <5.7mm in AP and <7.6mm in TR measurements. In aneurysmal aortas we expect 95% of differences to be <8.0mm in AP and <10.6mm in TR measurements. CONCLUSION: The difference and variability between US and CT varies depends on the diameter of the aorta and how it is measured. These differences have importance for clinical practice and for research.
Authors: Jean H D Fasel; Diego Aguiar; Daniel Kiss-Bodolay; Xavier Montet; Afksendiyos Kalangos; Bojan V Stimec; Osman Ratib Journal: Surg Radiol Anat Date: 2015-11-09 Impact factor: 1.246
Authors: Rianne E van Rijswijk; Erik Groot Jebbink; Suzanne Holewijn; Nicky Stoop; Steven M van Sterkenburg; Michel M P J Reijnen Journal: J Clin Med Date: 2022-03-03 Impact factor: 4.241
Authors: Anh T V Nguyen; Geraldine B Hill; Matthew P T Versteeg; Ian A Thomson; Andre M van Rij Journal: Cardiovasc Ultrasound Date: 2013-11-22 Impact factor: 2.062
Authors: Jes S Lindholt; Axel C Diederichsen; Lars M Rasmussen; Lars Frost; Flemming H Steffensen; Jess Lambrechtsen; Grazina Urbonaviciene; Martin Busk; Kenneth Egstrup; Katrine L Kristensen; Carsten Behr Andersen; Rikke Søgaard Journal: Clin Epidemiol Date: 2020-01-23 Impact factor: 4.790
Authors: Abdulrahman M Alfuraih; Abdulaziz I Alrashed; Saleh O Almazyad; Mohammed J Alsaadi Journal: Ann Saudi Med Date: 2021-12-02 Impact factor: 1.526