Evaluation of differences between observers and automatic-manual measurements in calculation of Doppler parameters

Basit Öğe Kaydı
dc.contributor.authorUnal, B
dc.contributor.authorBagcier, S
dc.contributor.authorSimsir, I
dc.contributor.authorBilgili, Y
dc.contributor.authorKara, S
dc.date.accessioned2020-06-25T17:40:05Z
dc.date.available2020-06-25T17:40:05Z
dc.date.issued2004
dc.departmentKırıkkale Üniversitesi
dc.description.abstractObjective. We aimed to search for differences between observers and automatic and manual measurements in calculations of Doppler parameters. Methods. The middle cerebral artery (MCA), central retinal artery, ophthalmic artery (OA), common carotid artery (CCA), vertebral artery (VA), popliteal artery (PA), interlobar renal artery (IRA), and arcuate renal artery (ARA) were evaluated in 20 healthy subjects bilaterally Peak systolic velocity (PSV), end-diastolic velocity (EDV), time-averaged maximum velocity (TAMAX), resistive index (RI), and pulsatility index (Pi) were measured from the same spectrum manually by 3 observers and automatically. Results of 4 measurements were compared by analysis of variance and Pearson tests. Results. The comparison of the 4 measurements revealed significant differences for most parameters except TAMAX of the OA, VA, and ARA and PSV EDV and PI of the PA. An automatic calculator yielded lower PSV, RI, and PI values (except the MCA and PA) and higher EDV values compared with manual measurements. The magnitudes of difference were in the range of 1% to 16% for velocities and 4% to 14% for RI and PI. The means of difference were 3.185 cm/s for PSV of the CCA and 0.054 for RI of the IRA. Correlation was high for PSV, EDV, and TAMAX in all arteries (except TAMAX of PA) and relatively low for PI and RI in most of the arteries. Conclusions. Although our study was performed on healthy subjects, our results showed that, in most cases, readers and the automatic approach disagreed on evaluation of Doppler parameters. This may be important in preventing false diagnoses in cases with Doppler values close to upper limits and may necessitate establishment of new limits for each method.en_US
dc.identifier.citationclosedAccessen_US
dc.identifier.doi10.7863/jum.2004.23.8.1041
dc.identifier.endpage1048en_US
dc.identifier.issn0278-4297
dc.identifier.issn1550-9613
dc.identifier.issue8en_US
dc.identifier.pmid15284462
dc.identifier.scopus2-s2.0-3543032175
dc.identifier.scopusqualityQ2
dc.identifier.startpage1041en_US
dc.identifier.urihttps://doi.org/10.7863/jum.2004.23.8.1041
dc.identifier.urihttps://hdl.handle.net/20.500.12587/3261
dc.identifier.volume23en_US
dc.identifier.wosWOS:000223113900007
dc.identifier.wosqualityQ2
dc.indekslendigikaynakWeb of Science
dc.indekslendigikaynakScopus
dc.indekslendigikaynakPubMed
dc.language.isoen
dc.publisherWileyen_US
dc.relation.ispartofJournal Of Ultrasound In Medicine
dc.relation.publicationcategoryMakale - Uluslararası Hakemli Dergi - Kurum Öğretim Elemanıen_US
dc.rightsinfo:eu-repo/semantics/closedAccessen_US
dc.subjectautomatic calculationen_US
dc.subjectautomatic calculationen_US
dc.subjectDoppler sonographyen_US
dc.subjectinterobserver variabilityen_US
dc.subjectmanual measurementen_US
dc.titleEvaluation of differences between observers and automatic-manual measurements in calculation of Doppler parametersen_US
dc.typeArticle

Dosyalar

Orijinal paket
Listeleniyor 1 - 1 / 1
[ X ]
İsim:
Evaluation of differences between observers and automatic-manual measurements in calculation of Doppler parameters.pdf
Boyut:
221.07 KB
Biçim:
Adobe Portable Document Format
Açıklama:
Tam Metin/Full Text
İndir

Koleksiyon

WOS İndeksli Yayınlar Koleksiyonu
Makale Koleksiyonu
PubMed İndeksli Yayınlar Koleksiyonu
Scopus İndeksli Yayınlar Koleksiyonu