Clinical validation of a software for quantitative follow-up of abdominal aortic aneurysm maximal diameter and growth by CT angiography
Fiche du document
16 octobre 2023
- handle: 10670/1.xw35w9
- doi: 10.1016/j.ejrad.2009.07.027
Attribution - Pas d’Utilisation Commerciale - Pas de Modification 4.0 International , https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc-nd/4.0/deed.fr
Sujets proches
RoentgenologistsCiter ce document
Claude Kauffmann et al., « Clinical validation of a software for quantitative follow-up of abdominal aortic aneurysm maximal diameter and growth by CT angiography », Papyrus : le dépôt institutionnel de l'Université de Montréal, ID : 10.1016/j.ejrad.2009.07.027
Métriques
Partage / Export
Résumé
Purpose To compare the reproducibility and accuracy of abdominal aortic aneurysm (AAA) maximal diameter (D-max) measurements using segmentation software, with manual measurement on double-oblique MPR as a reference standard. Materials and methods The local Ethics Committee approved this study and waived informed consent. Forty patients (33 men, 7 women; mean age, 72 years, range, 49–86 years) had previously undergone two CT angiography (CTA) studies within 16 ± 8 months for follow-up of AAA ≥35 mm without previous treatment. The 80 studies were segmented twice using the software to calculate reproducibility of automatic D-max calculation on 3D models. Three radiologists reviewed the 80 studies and manually measured D-max on double-oblique MPR projections. Intra-observer and inter-observer reproducibility were calculated by intraclass correlation coefficient (ICC). Systematic errors were evaluated by linear regression and Bland–Altman analyses. Differences in D-max growth were analyzed with a paired Student's t-test. Results The ICC for intra-observer reproducibility of D-max measurement was 0.992 (≥0.987) for the software and 0.985 (≥0.974) and 0.969 (≥0.948) for two radiologists. Inter-observer reproducibility was 0.979 (0.954–0.984) for the three radiologists. Mean absolute difference between semi-automated and manual D-max measurements was estimated at 1.1 ± 0.9 mm and never exceeded 5 mm. Conclusion Semi-automated software measurement of AAA D-max is reproducible, accurate, and requires minimal operator intervention.