Key result
Harmonized size readings for ultrasound and CT increased the correlation (r = 0.91) and reduced the systematic difference to +1.8 mm by CT compared to local readings.
Why the study?
Abdominal aortic aneurysm management depends on size, but uniform measurement guidelines are lacking and systematic differences exist between ultrasound- and CT-based estimation.
Does a standardized ultrasound acquisition and harmonized reading protocol improve agreement with CT-based size estimation in patients with small AAA?
Population
Patients with a small AAA who participated in two pharmaceutical intervention trials
Comparison
Protocolled ultrasound readings vs local and harmonized CT readings
Design
Observational study
Authors
Loading...
Harmonized readings may improve ultrasound-CT agreement in small AAA; hypothesis-generating for surveillance thresholds.
Observational
Does a standardized ultrasound acquisition and harmonized reading protocol improve agreement with CT-based size estimation in patients with small AAA?
Effect estimate: r = 0.91
Implementation of a standardized ultrasound acquisition and harmonized reading protocol improves agreement between ultrasound and CT measurements of AAA size, potentially reducing over- and undertreatment.
Tomee et al. (2021) conducted an observational in Abdominal aortic aneurysm (AAA). Harmonized size readings for ultrasound imaging and CT vs. Protocolled ultrasound readings and local CT readings was evaluated on Agreement between ultrasound readings and CT-based AAA diameters (r = 0.91). Harmonized size readings for ultrasound and CT increased the correlation (r = 0.91) and reduced the systematic difference to +1.8 mm by CT compared to local readings.
Synapse has enriched 5 closely related papers on similar clinical questions. Consider them for comparative context: