ArticleEuropean radiology2022
Registration-based semi-automatic assessment of aortic diameter growth rate from contrast-enhanced computed tomography outperforms manual quantification.
Article in European radiology, 2022. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 12 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled 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.
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.
Who cites it
12 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it, 29 citations in OpenAlex.
- Thoracic Aortic Aneurysm Growth Rates and Predicting Factors: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis.Journal of the American Heart Association · 2025Pooled it
- Predicting Abdominal Aortic Aneurysm Progression: The Role of 18F-Fluorodeoxyglucose Aortic Wall Uptake and Flow Dynamics.Life (Basel, Switzerland) · 2026Article
- Investigating the role of structural wall stress in aortic growth prognosis in acute uncomplicated type B aortic dissection.Biomechanics and modeling in mechanobiology · 2025Article
- AI-Based screening for thoracic aortic aneurysms in routine breast MRI.Nature communications · 2025Article
- Estimating nonlinear anisotropic properties of healthy and aneurysm ascending aortas using magnetic resonance imaging.Biomechanics and modeling in mechanobiology · 2025Article
- Developing technologies to assess vascular ageing: a roadmap from VascAgeNet.Physiological measurement · 2024Review
- Baseline Diameter Does Not Predict Growth Rate in a Presurgical Ascending Thoracic Aortic Aneurysm Population.Journal of the American Heart Association · 2024Article
- Three-dimensional aortic geometry mapping via registration of non-gated contrast-enhanced or gated and respiratory-navigated MR angiographies.Journal of cardiovascular magnetic resonance : official journal of the Society for Cardiovascular Magnetic Resonance · 2024Observational
- Magnetic Resonance Imaging and Computed Tomography for the Noninvasive Assessment of Arterial Aging: A Review by the VascAgeNet COST Action.Journal of the American Heart Association · 2023Review
- Aortic wall shear stress in bicuspid aortic valve disease-10-year follow-up.Cardiovascular diagnosis and therapy · 2023Article
- Unraveling Bicuspid Aortic Valve Enigmas by Multimodality Imaging: Clinical Implications.Journal of clinical medicine · 2022Review
- Dynamic Changes in the Aorta During the Cardiac Cycle Analyzed by ECG-Gated Computed Tomography.Frontiers in cardiovascular medicine · 2022Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
14 authors at 4 institutions in 1 country.
Funding
Abstract
objectivesManual assessment of aortic diameters on double-oblique reformatted computed tomography angiograms (CTA) is considered the current standard, although the reproducibility for growth rates has not been reported. Deformable registration of CTA has been proposed to provide 3D aortic diameters and growth maps, but validation is lacking. This study aimed to quantify accuracy and inter-observer reproducibility of registration-based and manual assessment of aortic diameters and growth rates.
methodsForty patients with ≥ 2 CTA acquired at least 6 months apart were included. Aortic diameters and growth rate were obtained in the aortic root and the entire thoracic aorta using deformable image registration by two independent observers, and compared with the current standard at typical anatomical landmarks.
resultsCompared with manual assessment, the registration-based technique presented low bias (0.46 mm), excellent agreement (ICC = 0.99), and similar inter-observer reproducibility (ICC = 0.99 for both) for aortic diameters; and low bias (0.10 mm/year), good agreement (ICC = 0.82), and much higher inter-observer reproducibility for growth rates (root: ICC = 0.96 vs 0.68; thoracic aorta: ICC = 0.96 vs 0.80). Registration-based growth rate reproducibility over a 6-month-long follow-up was similar to that obtained by manual assessment after 2.7 years (LoA = [- 0.01, 0.33] vs [- 0.13, 0.21] mm/year, respectively). Mapping of diameter and growth rate was highly reproducible (ICC > 0.9) in the whole thoracic aorta.
conclusionsRegistration-based assessment of aortic dilation on CTA is accurate and substantially more reproducible than the current standard, even at follow-up as short as 6 months, and provides robust 3D mapping of aortic diameters and growth rates beyond the pre-established anatomic landmarks. KEY POINTS: • Registration-based semi-automatic assessment of progressive aortic dilation on CTA is accurate and substantially more reproducible than the current standard. • The registration-based technique allows robust growth rate assessment at follow-up as short as 6 months, with a similar reproducibility to that obtained by manual assessment at around 3 years. • The use of image registration provides robust 3D mapping of aortic diameters and growth rates beyond the pre-established anatomic landmarks.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
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.