The repeatability, observer bias and instrument bias of aortic diameter measurement by ultrasonography, were investigated in ten patients with small (3–6 cm by computed tomography) infrarenal abdominal aortic aneurysm. The repeatability of maximum aortic diameter measurement by ultrasonography was much better for anterior—posterior than transverse diameter, with coefficients of repeatability 3·0–7·5 mm and 10–15 mm respectively. The repeatability of suprarenal aortic diameter measurement was poor. Surprisingly, maximum diameter using ultrasonography was larger than that using computed tomography, the difference being least for anterior—posterior measurements. At best a single, experienced observer, using the same instrument may provide aortic diameters using ultrasonography accurate to within 5 mm, but more commonly such aortic diameter is only accurate to within 8 mm.
[1]
D. Altman,et al.
STATISTICAL METHODS FOR ASSESSING AGREEMENT BETWEEN TWO METHODS OF CLINICAL MEASUREMENT
,
1986,
The Lancet.
[2]
B. Heather,et al.
General practice‐based population screening for abdominal aortic aneurysms: A pilot study
,
1989,
The British journal of surgery.
[3]
M. P. Nevitt,et al.
Prognosis of abdominal aortic aneurysms. A population-based study.
,
1989,
The New England journal of medicine.
[4]
H. Ashton,et al.
Routine ultrasound screening in management of abdominal aortic aneurysm
,
1988,
British medical journal.
[5]
J. Collin,et al.
OXFORD SCREENING PROGRAMME FOR ABDOMINAL AORTIC ANEURYSM IN MEN AGED 65 TO 74 YEARS
,
1988,
The Lancet.