A PHP Error was encountered

Severity: Warning

Message: file_get_contents(https://...@gmail.com&api_key=61f08fa0b96a73de8c900d749fcb997acc09&a=1): Failed to open stream: HTTP request failed! HTTP/1.1 429 Too Many Requests

Filename: helpers/my_audit_helper.php

Line Number: 176

Backtrace:

File: /var/www/html/application/helpers/my_audit_helper.php
Line: 176
Function: file_get_contents

File: /var/www/html/application/helpers/my_audit_helper.php
Line: 250
Function: simplexml_load_file_from_url

File: /var/www/html/application/helpers/my_audit_helper.php
Line: 1034
Function: getPubMedXML

File: /var/www/html/application/helpers/my_audit_helper.php
Line: 3152
Function: GetPubMedArticleOutput_2016

File: /var/www/html/application/controllers/Detail.php
Line: 575
Function: pubMedSearch_Global

File: /var/www/html/application/controllers/Detail.php
Line: 489
Function: pubMedGetRelatedKeyword

File: /var/www/html/index.php
Line: 316
Function: require_once

The relative effect of vendor variability in CT perfusion results: a method comparison study. | LitMetric

Objective: There are known interoperator, intraoperator, and intervendor software differences that can influence the reproducibility of quantitative CT perfusion values. The purpose of this study was to determine the relative impact of operator and software differences in CT perfusion variability.

Materials And Methods: CT perfusion imaging data were selected for 11 patients evaluated for suspected ischemic stroke. Three radiologists each independently postprocessed the source data twice, using four different vendor software applications. Results for cerebral blood volume (CBV), cerebral blood flow (CBF), and mean transit time (MTT) were recorded for the lentiform nuclei in both hemispheres. Repeated variables multivariate analysis of variance was used to assess differences in the means of CBV, CBF, and MTT. Bland-Altman analysis was used to assess agreement between pairs of vendors, readers, and read times.

Results: Choice of vendor software, but not interoperator or intraoperator disagreement, was associated with significant variability (p < 0.001) in CBV, CBF, and MTT. The mean difference in CT perfusion values was greater for pairs of vendors than for pairs of operators.

Conclusion: Different vendor software applications do not generate quantitative perfusion results equivalently. Intervendor difference is, by far, the largest cause of variability in perfusion results relative to interoperator and intraoperator difference. Caution should be exercised when interpreting quantitative CT perfusion results because these values may vary considerably depending on the postprocessing software.

Download full-text PDF

Source
http://dx.doi.org/10.2214/AJR.10.6058DOI Listing

Publication Analysis

Top Keywords

interoperator intraoperator
12
quantitative perfusion
12
perfusion values
12
vendor software
12
perfusion
8
variability perfusion
8
software differences
8
software applications
8
cerebral blood
8
cbv cbf
8

Similar Publications

Want AI Summaries of new PubMed Abstracts delivered to your In-box?

Enter search terms and have AI summaries delivered each week - change queries or unsubscribe any time!