A PHP Error was encountered

Severity: Warning

Message: file_get_contents(https://...@pubfacts.com&api_key=b8daa3ad693db53b1410957c26c9a51b4908&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: 3122
Function: getPubMedXML

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

Superior Reproducibility of the Leading to Leading Edge and Inner to Inner Edge Methods in the Ultrasound Assessment of Maximum Abdominal Aortic Diameter. | LitMetric

Objectives: Controversy exists regarding optimal caliper placement in ultrasound assessment of maximum abdominal aortic diameter. This study aimed primarily to determine reproducibility of caliper placement in relation to the aortic wall with the three principal methods: leading to leading edge (LTL), inner to inner edge (ITI), and outer to outer edge (OTO). The secondary aim was to assess the mean difference between the OTO, ITI, and LTL diameters and estimate the impact of using either of these methods on abdominal aortic aneurysm (AAA) prevalence in a screening program.

Methods: Radiologists (n=18) assessed the maximum antero-posterior abdominal aortic diameter by completing repeated caliper placements with the OTO, LTL, and ITI methods on 50 still abdominal aortic images obtained from an AAA screening program. Inter-observer reproducibility was calculated as the limit of agreement with the mean (LoA), which represents expected deviation of a single observer from the mean of all observers. Intra-observer reproducibility was assessed averaging the LoA for each observer with their repeated measurements. Based on data from an AAA screening trial and the estimated mean differences between the three principal methods, AAA prevalence was estimated using each of the methods.

Results: The inter-observer LoA of the OTO, ITI, and LTL was 2.6, 1.9, and 1.9 mm, whereas the intra-observer LoA was 2.0, 1.6, and 1.5 mm, respectively. Mean differences of 5.0 mm were found between OTO and ITI measurements, 2.6 mm between OTO and LTL measurements, and 2.4 mm between LTL and ITI measurements. The prevalence of AAA almost doubled using OTO instead of ITI, while the difference between ITI and LTL was minor (3.3% vs. 4.0% AAA).

Conclusions: The study shows superior reproducibility of LTL and ITI compared with the OTO method of caliper placement in ultrasound determination of maximum abdominal aortic diameter, and the choice of caliper placement method significantly affects the prevalence of AAAs in screening programs.

Download full-text PDF

Source
http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.ejvs.2017.11.019DOI Listing

Publication Analysis

Top Keywords

abdominal aortic
24
aortic diameter
16
caliper placement
16
oto iti
16
maximum abdominal
12
iti ltl
12
ltl iti
12
iti
9
superior reproducibility
8
leading leading
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!