Abstract
Purpose
To compare different methods measuring abdominal aortic aneurysm (AAA) maximal diameter (Dmax) and its progression on multidetector computed tomography (MDCT) scan.
Materials and Methods
Forty AAA patients with two MDCT scans acquired at different times (baseline and follow-up) were included. Three observers measured AAA diameters by seven different methods: on axial images (anteroposterior, transverse, maximal, and short-axis views) and on multiplanar reformation (MPR) images (coronal, sagittal, and orthogonal views). Diameter measurement and progression were compared over time for the seven methods. Reproducibility of measurement methods was assessed by intraclass correlation coefficient (ICC) and Bland–Altman analysis.
Results
Dmax, as measured on axial slices at baseline and follow-up (FU) MDCTs, was greater than that measured using the orthogonal method (p = 0.046 for baseline and 0.028 for FU), whereas Dmax measured with the orthogonal method was greater those using all other measurement methods (p-value range: <0.0001–0.03) but anteroposterior diameter (p = 0.18 baseline and 0.10 FU). The greatest interobserver ICCs were obtained for the orthogonal and transverse methods (0.972) at baseline and for the orthogonal and sagittal MPR images at FU (0.973 and 0.977). Interobserver ICC of the orthogonal method to document AAA progression was greater (ICC = 0.833) than measurements taken on axial images (ICC = 0.662–0.780) and single-plane MPR images (0.772–0.817).
Conclusion
AAA Dmax measured on MDCT axial slices overestimates aneurysm size. Diameter as measured by the orthogonal method is more reproducible, especially to document AAA progression.
Similar content being viewed by others
References
Nevitt MP, Ballard DJ, Hallett JW Jr (1989) Prognosis of abdominal aortic aneurysms. A population-based study. N Engl J Med 321:1009–1014
Katz DA, Littenberg B, Cronenwett JL (1992) Management of small abdominal aortic aneurysms. Early surgery vs watchful waiting. JAMA 268:2678–2686
The UK Small Aneurysm Trial Participants (1988) Mortality results for randomised controlled trial of early elective surgery or ultrasonographic surveillance for small abdominal aortic aneurysms. Lancet 352:1649–1655
Brewster DC, Cronenwett JL, Hallett JW Jr, Johnston KW, Krupski WC, Matsumura JS (2003) Guidelines for the treatment of abdominal aortic aneurysms. Report of a subcommittee of the Joint Council of the American Association for Vascular Surgery and Society for Vascular Surgery. J Vasc Surg 37:1106–1117
Brady AR, Thompson SG, Fowkes FG, Greenhalgh RM, Powell JT (2004) Abdominal aortic aneurysm expansion: risk factors and time intervals for surveillance. Circulation 110:16–21
Wolf YG, Hill BB, Rubin GD, Fogarty TJ, Zarins CK (2000) Rate of change in abdominal aortic aneurysm diameter after endovascular repair. J Vasc Surg 32:108–115
Hackmann AE, Rubin BG, Sanchez LA, Geraghty PA, Thompson RW, Curci JA (2008) A randomized, placebo-controlled trial of doxycycline after endoluminal aneurysm repair. J Vasc Surg 48:519–526 (discussion 526)
Gadowski GR, Pilcher DB, Ricci MA (1994) Abdominal aortic aneurysm expansion rate: effect of size and beta-adrenergic blockade. J Vasc Surg 19:727–731
Hatakeyama T, Shigematsu H, Muto T (2001) Risk factors for rupture of abdominal aortic aneurysm based on three-dimensional study. J Vasc Surg 33:453–461
Kritpracha B, Beebe HG, Comerota AJ (2004) Aortic diameter is an insensitive measurement of early aneurysm expansion after endografting. J Endovasc Ther 11:184–190
van Prehn J, van der Wal MB, Vincken K, Bartels LW, Moll FL, van Herwaarden JA (2008) Intra- and interobserver variability of aortic aneurysm volume measurement with fast CTA postprocessing software. J Endovasc Ther 15:504–510
Wever JJ, Blankensteijn JD, Th MMWP, Eikelboom BC (2000) Maximal aneurysm diameter follow-up is inadequate after endovascular abdominal aortic aneurysm repair. Eur J Vasc Endovasc Surg 20:177–182
Wolf YG, Tillich M, Lee WA, Fogarty TJ, Zarins CK, Rubin GD (2002) Changes in aneurysm volume after endovascular repair of abdominal aortic aneurysm. J Vasc Surg 36:305–309
Bley TA, Chase PJ, Reeder SB et al (2009) Endovascular abdominal aortic aneurysm repair: nonenhanced volumetric CT for follow-up. Radiology 253(1):253–262
Bargellini I, Cioni R, Petruzzi P et al (2005) Endovascular repair of abdominal aortic aneurysms: analysis of aneurysm volumetric changes at mid-term follow-up. Cardiovasc Intervent Radiol 28:426–433
White RA, Donayre CE, Walot I, Woody J, Kim N, Kopchok GE (2001) Computed tomography assessment of abdominal aortic aneurysm morphology after endograft exclusion. J Vasc Surg 33(Suppl 2):S1–S10
van Keulen JW, van Prehn J, Prokop M, Moll FL, van Herwaarden JA (2009) Potential value of aneurysm sac volume measurements in addition to diameter measurements after endovascular aneurysm repair. J Endovasc Ther 16:506–513
Lederle FA, Wilson SE, Johnson GR et al (1995) Variability in measurement of abdominal aortic aneurysms. Abdominal Aortic Aneurysm Detection and Management Veterans Administration Cooperative Study Group. J Vasc Surg 21:945–952
Dillavou ED, Buck DG, Muluk SC, Makaroun MS (2003) Two-dimensional versus three-dimensional CT scan for aortic measurement. J Endovasc Ther 10:531–538
Aarts NJ, Schurink GW, Schultze Kool LJ et al (1999) Abdominal aortic aneurysm measurements for endovascular repair: Intra- and interobserver variability of CT measurements. Eur J Vasc Endovasc Surg 18:475–480
Matsumura JS, Pearce WH, McCarthy WJ, Yao JS (1997) Reduction in aortic aneurysm size: early results after endovascular graft placement. EVT Investigators. J Vasc Surg 25:113–123
Rhee RY, Eskandari MK, Zajko AB, Makaroun MS (2000) Long-term fate of the aneurysmal sac after endoluminal exclusion of abdominal aortic aneurysms. J Vasc Surg 32:689–696
Wanhainen A, Bergqvist D, Bjorck M (2002) Measuring the abdominal aorta with ultrasonography and computed tomography—difference and variability. Eur J Vasc Endovasc Surg 24:428–434
Abada HT, Sapoval MR, Paul JF, de Maertelaer V, Mousseaux E, Gaux JC (2003) Aneurysmal sizing after endovascular repair in patients with abdominal aortic aneurysm: interobserver variability of various measurement protocols and its clinical relevance. Eur Radiol 13:2699–2704
Singh K, Jacobsen BK, Solberg S et al (2003) Intra- and interobserver variability in the measurements of abdominal aortic and common iliac artery diameter with computed tomography. The Tromso Study. Eur J Vasc Endovasc Surg 25:399–407
Cayne NS, Veith FJ, Lipsitz EC et al (2004) Variability of maximal aortic aneurysm diameter measurements on CT scan: significance and methods to minimize. J Vasc Surg 39:811–815
Sprouse LR II, Meier GH III, Parent FN, DeMasi RJ, Glickman MH, Barber GA (2004) Is ultrasound more accurate than axial computed tomography for determination of maximal abdominal aortic aneurysm diameter? Eur J Vasc Endovasc Surg 28:28–35
Chaikof EL, Blankensteijn JD, Harris PL et al (2002) Reporting standards for endovascular aortic aneurysm repair. J Vasc Surg 35:1048–1060
Elkouri S, Panneton JM, Andrews JC et al (2004) Computed tomography and ultrasound in follow-up of patients after endovascular repair of abdominal aortic aneurysm. Ann Vasc Surg 18:271–279
Sprouse LR II, Meier GH III, Lesar CJ et al (2003) Comparison of abdominal aortic aneurysm diameter measurements obtained with ultrasound and computed tomography: is there a difference? J Vasc Surg 38:466–471 (discussion 471–462)
Bargellini I, Cioni R, Napoli V et al (2009) Ultrasonographic surveillance with selective CTA after endovascular repair of abdominal aortic aneurysm. J Endovasc Ther 16:93–104
Singh K, Jacobsen BK, Solberg S, Kumar S, Arnesen E (2004) The difference between ultrasound and computed tomography (CT) measurements of aortic diameter increases with aortic diameter: analysis of axial images of abdominal aortic and common iliac artery diameter in normal and aneurysmal aortas. The Tromso Study, 1994–1995. Eur J Vasc Endovasc Surg 28:158–167
Jaakkola P, Hippelainen M, Farin P, Rytkonen H, Kainulainen S, Partanen K (1996) Interobserver variability in measuring the dimensions of the abdominal aorta: comparison of ultrasound and computed tomography. Eur J Vasc Endovasc Surg 12:230–237
Wever JJ, Blankensteijn JD, van Rijn JC, Broeders IA, Eikelboom BC, Mali WP (2000) Inter- and intraobserver variability of CT measurements obtained after endovascular repair of abdominal aortic aneurysms. AJR Am J Roentgenol 175:1279–1282
Olabarriaga SD, Rouet JM, Fradkin M, Breeuwer M, Niessen WJ (2005) Segmentation of thrombus in abdominal aortic aneurysms from CTA with nonparametric statistical grey level appearance modeling. IEEE Trans Med Imaging 24:477–485
Kauffmann C, Tang A, Dugas A, Therasse E, Oliva V, Soulez G (2009) Clinical validation of a software for quantitative follow-up of abdominal aortic aneurysm maximal diameter and growth by CT angiography. Eur J Radiol 77(3):502–508
Acknowledgments
This work was supported by a clinical research scholarship (to G. S.) from Fonds de la Recherche en Santé du Québec; an operating grant from the Ministère du Développement Économique, de L’innovation et de L’exportation du Québec (Grant No. PSVT3-12792); and the Canadian Head of Academic Radiologist.
Conflict of interest
None.
Author information
Authors and Affiliations
Corresponding author
Rights and permissions
About this article
Cite this article
Dugas, A., Therasse, É., Kauffmann, C. et al. Reproducibility of Abdominal Aortic Aneurysm Diameter Measurement and Growth Evaluation on Axial and Multiplanar Computed Tomography Reformations. Cardiovasc Intervent Radiol 35, 779–787 (2012). https://doi.org/10.1007/s00270-011-0259-y
Received:
Accepted:
Published:
Issue Date:
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s00270-011-0259-y