Comparison of abdominal aortic aneurysm diameter measurements obtained with ultrasound and computed tomography: Is there a difference?

Journal of Vascular Surgery

Volumn 38, Issue 3, 2003, Pages 466-471

  Sprouse II, L Richard ^a,b   Meier III, George H ^a,b   LeSar, Christopher J ^a,b   DeMasi, Richard J ^a,b   Sood, Jaideep ^a,b   Parent, F Noel ^a,b   Marcinzyck, Michael J ^a,b   Gayle, Robert G ^a,b   Garrett Jr , H Edward ^a  

^a Eastern Virginia Medical School ^*

^b EASTERN VIRGINIA MEDICAL SCHOOL   (United States)

Author keywords

[No Author keywords available]

Indexed keywords

ABDOMINAL AORTA ANEURYSM; ARTICLE; BLOOD VESSEL DIAMETER; COMPARATIVE STUDY; COMPUTER ASSISTED TOMOGRAPHY; CONTROLLED STUDY; ECHOGRAPHY; HUMAN; MAJOR CLINICAL STUDY; PRIORITY JOURNAL; COHORT ANALYSIS; DOPPLER FLOWMETRY; FEMALE; HOSPITALIZATION; MALE; METHODOLOGY; RADIOGRAPHY; REGISTER; SENSITIVITY AND SPECIFICITY;

AORTIC ANEURYSM, ABDOMINAL; COHORT STUDIES; FEMALE; HUMANS; MALE; REGISTRIES; SENSITIVITY AND SPECIFICITY; SEVERITY OF ILLNESS INDEX; TOMOGRAPHY, X-RAY COMPUTED; ULTRASONOGRAPHY, DOPPLER;

EID: 0141835866     PISSN: 07415214     EISSN: None     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1016/S0741-5214(03)00367-7     Document Type: Article

References (28)

1. Glimaker H, Holmberg L, Elvin A, et al. Natural history of patients with abdominal aortic aneurysm. Eur J Vasc Surg 1991;5:125-30.
2. Stonebridge PA, Draper T, Kelman J, et al. Growth rate of infrarenal aortic aneurysms. Eur J Vasc Endovasc Surg 1996;11:70-3.
3. Englund R, Hudson P, Hanel K, Stanton A. Expansion rates of small abdominal aortic aneurysms. Aust N Z J Surg 1998;68:21-4.
4. Hertzer NR, Beven EG. Ultrasound aortic measurement and elective aneurysmectomy. JAMA 1978;240:1966-8.
5. Hirose Y, Hamada S, Takamiya M, Imakita S, Naito H, Nishimnra T. Aortic aneurysms: growth rates measured with CT. Radiology 1992; 185:249-52.
6. Guirguis EM, Barber GG. The natural history of abdominal aortic aneurysms. Am J Surg 1991;162:481-3.
7. Nevitt MP, Ballard DJ, Hallett JW Jr. Prognosis of abdominal aortic aneurysms: a population-based study. N Engl J Med 1989;321:1009-14.
8. Wolf YG, Bernstein EF. A current perspective on the natural history of abdominal aortic aneurysms. Cardiovasc Surg 1994;2:16-22.
9. Graeve AH, Carpenter CM, Wicks JD, Edwards WS. Discordance in the sizing of abdominal aortic aneurysm and its significance. Am J Surg 1982;144:627-34.
10. Bernstein EF, Chan EL. Abdominal aortic aneurysm in high-risk patients: outcome of selective management based on size and expansion rate. Ann Surg 1984;200:255-63.
11. Jaakkola P, Hippelainen M, Farin P, Rytkonen H, Kainulainen S, Partanen K. Interobserver variability in measuring the dimensions of the abdominal aorta: comparison of ultrasound and computed tomography. Eur J Vasc Endovasc Surg 1996;12:230-7.
12. Delhi A, Ohlsen H, Swedenborg J. Growth rate of abdominal aortic aneurysms as measured by computed tomography. Br J Surg 1985;72: 530-2.
13. Hollier LH, Taylor LM, Ochsner J. Recommended indications for operative treatment of abdominal aortic aneurysms. Report of a sub-committee of the Joint Council of the Society for Vascular Surgery and the North American Chapter of the International Society for Cardiovascular Surgery. J Vasc Surg 1992;15:1046-56.
14. Brown PM, Pattenden R, Vernooy C, Zelt DT, Gutelius JR. Selective management of abdominal aortic aneurysms in a prospective measurement program. J Vasc Surg 1996;23:213-20; discussion 221-2.
15. d'Audiffret A, Desgranges P, Kobeiter DH, Becquemin JP. Follow-up evaluation of endoluminally treated abdominal aortic aneurysms with duplex ultrasonography: validation with computed tomography. J Vasc Surg 2001;33:42-50.
16. Lederle FA, Wilson SE, Johnson GR, et al. Variability in measurement of abdominal aortic aneurysms. Abdominal Aortic Aneurysm Detection and Management Veterans Administration Cooperative Study Group. J Vase Surg 1995;21:945-52.
17. Pages S, Favre JP, Cerisier A, Pyneeandee S, Boissier C, Veyret C. Comparison of color duplex ultrasound and computed tomography scan for surveillance after aortic endografting. Ann Vasc Surg 2001;15: 155-62.
18. Thompson MM, Boyle JR, Hartshorn T, et al. Comparison of computed tomography and duplex imaging in assessing aortic morphology following endovascular aneurysm repair. Br J Surg 1998;85:346-50.
19. Wolf YG, Johnson BL, Hill BB, Rubin GD, Fogarty TJ, Zarins CK. Duplex ultrasound scanning versus computed tomographic angiography for postoperative evaluation of endovascular abdominal aortic aneurysm repair. J Vasc Surg 2000;32:1142-8.
20. Parent FN, Meier GH, Godziachvili V, et al. The incidence and natural history of type I and II endoleak: a 5-year follow-up assessment with color duplex ultrasound scan. J Vasc Surg 2002;35:474-81.
21. Sato DT, Goff CD, Gregory RT, et al. Endoleak after aortic stent graft repair: diagnosis by color duplex ultrasound scan versus computed tomography scan. J Vasc Surg 1998;28:657-63.
22. Gomes MN, Hakkal HG, Schellinger D. Ultrasonography and CT scanning: a comparative study of abdominal aortic aneurysms. Comput Tomogr 1978;2:99-109.
23. Ellis M, Powell JT, Greenhalgh RM. Limitations of ultrasonography in surveillance of small abdominal aortic aneurysms. Br J Surg 1991;78: 614-6.
24. Evans GH, Stansby G, Hamilton G. Suggested standards for reporting on arterial aneurysms. J Vasc Surg 1992;15:456.
25. Bland JM, Altman DG. Statistical methods for assessing agreement between two methods of clinical measurement. Lancet 1986;1:307-10.
26. The UK. Small Aneurysm Trial: design, methods and progress. The UK Small Aneurysm Trial participants. Eur J Vasc Endovasc Surg 1995;9: 42-8.
27. Lederle FA, Wilson SE, Johnson GR, et al. Design of the abdominal aortic Aneurysm Detection and Management Study. ADAM VA Cooperative Study Group. J Vasc Surg 1994;20:296-303.
28. Walker SR, Macierewicz J, Elmarasy NM, Gregson RH, Whitaker SC, Hopkinson BR. A prospective study to assess changes in proximal aortic neck dimensions after endovascular repair of abdominal aortic aneurysms. J Vasc Surg 1999;29:625-30.