4.7 Article

Reader and platform reproducibility for quantitative assessment of carotid atherosclerotic plaque using 1.5T Siemens, Philips, and general electric scanners

Journal

JOURNAL OF MAGNETIC RESONANCE IMAGING
Volume 26, Issue 2, Pages 344-352

Publisher

JOHN WILEY & SONS INC
DOI: 10.1002/jmri.21004

Keywords

carotid arteries; atherosclerosis; magnetic resonance imaging; reproducibility

Funding

  1. NHLBI NIH HHS [P01 HL072262, R01 HL073401] Funding Source: Medline

Ask authors/readers for more resources

Purpose: To evaluate the platform and reader reproducibility of quantitative carotid plaque measurements. Materials and Methods: A total of 32 individuals with >= 15% carotid stenosis by duplex ultrasound were each imaged once by a 1.5T General Electric (GE) whole body scanner and twice by either a 1.5T Philips scanner or a 1.5T Siemens scanner. A standardized multisequence protocol and identical phased-array carotid coils were used. Expert readers, blinded to subject information, scanner type, and time point, measured the lumen, wall, and total vessel areas and determined the modified American Heart Association lesion type (AHA-LT) on the cross-sectional images. Results: AHA-LT was consistently identified across the same (K = 0.75) and different scan platforms (K = 0.75). Furthermore, scan-rescan coefficients of variation (CV) of wall area measurements on Siemens and Philips scanners ranged from 6.3% to 7.5%. However, wall area measurements differed between Philips and GE (P = 0.003) and between Siemens and GE (P = 0.05). In general, intrareader reproducibility was higher than interreader reproducibility for AHA-LT identification as well as for quantitative measurements. Conclusion: All three scanners produced images that allowed AHA-LT to be consistently identified. Reproducibility of quantitative measurements by Siemens and Philips scanners were comparable to previous studies using 1.5T GE scanners. However, bias was introduced with each scanner and the use of different readers substantially increased variability. We therefore recommend using the same platform and the same reader for scans of individual subjects undergoing serial assessment of carotid atherosclerosis.

Authors

I am an author on this paper
Click your name to claim this paper and add it to your profile.

Reviews

Primary Rating

4.7
Not enough ratings

Secondary Ratings

Novelty
-
Significance
-
Scientific rigor
-
Rate this paper

Recommended

No Data Available
No Data Available