Logo image
Back
Two-Dimensional versus Three-Dimensional CT Scan for Aortic Measurement
Journal article   Peer reviewed

Two-Dimensional versus Three-Dimensional CT Scan for Aortic Measurement

Ellen D. Dillavou, David G. Buck, Satish C. Muluk and Michel S. Makaroun
Journal of endovascular therapy, v 10(3), pp 531-538
Jun 2003
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1177/152660280301000319
PMID: 12932165
Featured in Collection :   UN Sustainable Development Goals @ Drexel

Abstract

computed tomography endovascular repair neck diameter 3D reconstruction sac diameter abdominal aortic aneurysm aortic measurement
Purpose: To examine if 3-dimensional (3D) reconstructions of computed tomographic (CT) data, by imaging perpendicular to blood flow, can improve aortic diameter measurement accuracy over axial (2D) CT. Methods: Two independent, blinded observers used electronic calipers to measure the minor axis and the line perpendicular to it on 40 2.5-mm 2D CT scans from 31 patients. A circular electronic tool was used to estimate diameters on 3D reconstructions from the same 40 scans. Measurements of the aortic neck were obtained 5 mm below the renal arteries and the widest slice of the aneurysm was used to measure sac diameter. Only the minor axis was measured at the iliac arteries immediately above the left (LI) and right (RI) iliac bifurcations. Datasets were compared with an intraclass correlation coefficient (ICC), Bland and Altman variation assessments, and absolute differences. Results: ICC between 2D and 3D scans demonstrated high correlation with 2D minor axis measurements (neck=0.9282, sac=0.8956, RI=0.8755, LI=0.7381). 3D to 2D major axis correlation was lower (neck=0.6388, sac=0.8995). Variation between 3D and 2D minor axis measurements was low (0.51-mm average variation from the mean for the minor axis and 1.30-mm variation for the major axis). Average absolute difference between 3D and 2D diameters was 1.01 mm (minor axis) versus 2.61 mm (major axis). Interobserver correlation was highest for sac measurements both in 2D minor axis (ICC=0.8990) and 3D (ICC=0.9518). Conclusions: Minor axis measurements on axial CT scan can substitute for diameters obtained from 3D reconstructions in most clinical situations.

Metrics

5 Record Views
31 citations in Web of Science

Details

UN Sustainable Development Goals (SDGs)

This publication has contributed to the advancement of the following goals:

#3 Good Health and Well-Being

InCites Highlights

Data related to this publication, from InCites Benchmarking & Analytics tool:

Web of Science research areas
Peripheral Vascular Disease
Surgery
Logo image