Evidence map›Paper›PMID 33179389›Full record

ArticleJournal of magnetic resonance imaging : JMRI2021

Reproducibility of Aorta Segmentation on 4D Flow MRI in Healthy Volunteers.

Joe F Juffermans, Jos J M Westenberg, Pieter J van den Boogaard, Arno A W Roest, Hans C van Assen, Roel L F van der Palen, Hildo J Lamb

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Journal of magnetic resonance imaging : JMRI, 2021. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 18 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
18citing papers in PubMed
–field-weighted citation impact
1 · What the graph read from it

What it found

Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.

The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.

2 · The registry

The trial behind it

Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.

Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

18 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Article
  2. Article
  3. Article
  4. Article
  5. Review
  6. Article
  7. Article
  8. Article
  9. Article
  10. 4D Flow cardiovascular magnetic resonance consensus statement: 2023 update.Journal of cardiovascular magnetic resonance : official journal of the Society for Cardiovascular Magnetic Resonance · 2023
    Review
  11. Article
  12. Article
  13. Article
  14. Article
  15. 4D flow cardiovascular magnetic resonance derived energetics in the Fontan circulation correlate with exercise capacity and CMR-derived liver fibrosis/congestion.Journal of cardiovascular magnetic resonance : official journal of the Society for Cardiovascular Magnetic Resonance · 2022
    Article
  16. Quality Control for 4D Flow MR Imaging.Magnetic resonance in medical sciences : MRMS : an official journal of Japan Society of Magnetic Resonance in Medicine · 2022
    Article
  17. Article
  18. Article
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

7 authors.

Joe F JuffermansDepartment of Radiology, Leiden University Medical Center, Leiden, The Netherlands.ORCID 0000-0001-8914-8279
Jos J M WestenbergDepartment of Radiology, Leiden University Medical Center, Leiden, The Netherlands.ORCID 0000-0003-1946-1715
Pieter J van den BoogaardDepartment of Radiology, Leiden University Medical Center, Leiden, The Netherlands.
Arno A W RoestDepartment of Paediatric Cardiology, Leiden University Medical Center, Leiden, The Netherlands.
Hans C van AssenDepartment of Radiology, Leiden University Medical Center, Leiden, The Netherlands.
Roel L F van der PalenDepartment of Paediatric Cardiology, Leiden University Medical Center, Leiden, The Netherlands.
Hildo J LambDepartment of Radiology, Leiden University Medical Center, Leiden, The Netherlands.

Funding

Hartstichting CVON2017-08-RADAR
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundHemodynamic aorta parameters can be derived from 4D flow MRI, but this requires lumen segmentation. In both commercially available and research 4D flow MRI software tools, lumen segmentation is mostly (semi-)automatically performed and subsequently manually improved by an observer. Since the segmentation variability, together with 4D flow MRI data and image processing algorithms, will contribute to the reproducibility of patient-specific flow properties, the observer's lumen segmentation reproducibility and repeatability needs to be assessed. PURPOSE: To determine the interexamination, interobserver reproducibility, and intraobserver repeatability of aortic lumen segmentation on 4D flow MRI. STUDY TYPE: Prospective and retrospective. POPULATION: A healthy volunteer cohort of 10 subjects who underwent 4D flow MRI twice. Also, a clinical cohort of six subjects who underwent 4D flow MRI once. FIELD STRENGTH/SEQUENCE: 3T; time-resolved three-directional and 3D velocity-encoded sequence (4D flow MRI). ASSESSMENT: The thoracic aorta was segmented on the 4D flow MRI in five systolic phases. By positioning six planes perpendicular to a segmentation's centerline, the aorta was divided into five segments. The volume, surface area, centerline length, maximal diameter, and curvature radius were determined for each segment. STATISTICAL TESTS: To assess the reproducibility, the coefficient of variation (COV), Pearson correlation coefficient (r), and intraclass correlation coefficient (ICC) were calculated.

resultsThe interexamination and interobserver reproducibility and intraobserver repeatability were comparable for each parameter. For both cohorts there was very good reproducibility and repeatability for volume, surface area, and centerline length (COV = 10-32%, r = 0.54-0.95 and ICC = 0.65-0.99), excellent reproducibility and repeatability for maximal diameter (COV = 3-11%, r = 0.94-0.99, ICC = 0.94-0.99), and good reproducibility and repeatability for curvature radius (COV = 25-62%, r = 0.73-0.95, ICC = 0.84-0.97). DATA

conclusionThis study demonstrated no major reproducibility and repeatability limitations for 4D flow MRI aortic lumen segmentation. LEVEL OF EVIDENCE: 3 TECHNICAL EFFICACY STAGE: 2.

Indexed as

AdultAortaFemaleHealthy VolunteersHumansImage Processing, Computer-AssistedImaging, Three-DimensionalMagnetic Resonance ImagingMaleObserver VariationProspective StudiesReproducibility of ResultsRetrospective Studies4D flow MRIaortaaortic diameterrepeatabilityreproducibilitysegmentation

Identifiers

PMID33179389
PMCPMC7984392

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.