A Long1, L Rouet, J S Lindholt, E Allaire. 1. Vascular Medicine, Centre Hospitalier Universitaire de Reims, Reims, France. along@chu-reims.fr
Abstract
OBJECTIVES: Maximum diameter is a determinant parameter for the clinical management of asymptomatic abdominal aortic aneurysm (AAA). However, its measurement is not standardised. We review the different methods used to measure AAA maximum diameter, with ultrasound (US) or computed tomography (CT). METHODS: A review of maximum diameter measurement methods with US and CT was performed, focussing on screening, surveillance before repair and decision for intervention. Diameter measurement methodology was described according to four parameters: plane of acquisition, axis of measurement, position of callipers and selected diameter. A quality score to evaluate methodology descriptions was defined (plane, axis, callipers placement and selected diameter), ranging from 0 (worst) to 4 (best). RESULTS: Review showed a wide range of definitions and practices. The mean value of the quality score was 2.52 in screening studies, 1.66 in guidelines for screening, 2.81 in follow-up studies and 1.63 in studies describing decision for intervention. CONCLUSION: To improve the efficiency of AAA management (in screening programmes, follow-up and decision for intervention), and enable comparison between future studies, a standardised methodology for AAA maximum diameter measurement is necessary. Until such a consensus is reached, publications should at least clearly report the method of measurement.
OBJECTIVES: Maximum diameter is a determinant parameter for the clinical management of asymptomatic abdominal aortic aneurysm (AAA). However, its measurement is not standardised. We review the different methods used to measure AAA maximum diameter, with ultrasound (US) or computed tomography (CT). METHODS: A review of maximum diameter measurement methods with US and CT was performed, focussing on screening, surveillance before repair and decision for intervention. Diameter measurement methodology was described according to four parameters: plane of acquisition, axis of measurement, position of callipers and selected diameter. A quality score to evaluate methodology descriptions was defined (plane, axis, callipers placement and selected diameter), ranging from 0 (worst) to 4 (best). RESULTS: Review showed a wide range of definitions and practices. The mean value of the quality score was 2.52 in screening studies, 1.66 in guidelines for screening, 2.81 in follow-up studies and 1.63 in studies describing decision for intervention. CONCLUSION: To improve the efficiency of AAA management (in screening programmes, follow-up and decision for intervention), and enable comparison between future studies, a standardised methodology for AAA maximum diameter measurement is necessary. Until such a consensus is reached, publications should at least clearly report the method of measurement.
Authors: Sebastian Fernandez-Alonso; Esther Martinez-Aguilar; Susana Ravassa; Josune Orbe; Jose A Paramo; Leopoldo Fernandez-Alonso; Carmen Roncal Journal: Life (Basel) Date: 2022-05-31
Authors: Liangliang Zhang; Byron A Zambrano; Jongeun Choi; Whal Lee; Seungik Baek; Chae Young Lim Journal: J Int Med Res Date: 2020-11 Impact factor: 1.671