2019
DOI: 10.1148/ryct.2019180012
|View full text |Cite
|
Sign up to set email alerts
|

Inter- and Intraoperator Variability in Measurement of On-Site CT-derived Fractional Flow Reserve Based on Structural and Fluid Analysis: A Comprehensive Analysis

Help me understand this report

Search citation statements

Order By: Relevance

Paper Sections

Select...
5

Citation Types

0
16
0

Year Published

2020
2020
2022
2022

Publication Types

Select...
5
1

Relationship

3
3

Authors

Journals

citations
Cited by 11 publications
(18 citation statements)
references
References 19 publications
0
16
0
Order By: Relevance
“…This variation between operators can be attributed to differences in the vessel centerline placement and the segmentation of the lesion, and highlights a potential advantage to an automatic machine learning‐based algorithm. This variation between users with different levels of experience has been assessed and reported in the literature 30 . There is no such variability with the trained network.…”
Section: Discussionmentioning
confidence: 88%
See 1 more Smart Citation
“…This variation between operators can be attributed to differences in the vessel centerline placement and the segmentation of the lesion, and highlights a potential advantage to an automatic machine learning‐based algorithm. This variation between users with different levels of experience has been assessed and reported in the literature 30 . There is no such variability with the trained network.…”
Section: Discussionmentioning
confidence: 88%
“…This variation between users with different levels of experience has been assessed and reported in the literature. 30 There is no such variability with the trained network.…”
Section: Discussionmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…These studies featuring both on-site and off-site approaches have reported a high degree of inter-operator correlation which was consistent among operators of different expertise and training. [20,21] Moreover, the previously cited study also emphasized decreased variabilities in operators receiving face-to-face training [20]. As such in-person training may counter a potential source of variability which has been the incorrect determination of centerline [20,22].…”
Section: Discussionmentioning
confidence: 92%
“…[20,21] Moreover, the previously cited study also emphasized decreased variabilities in operators receiving face-to-face training [20]. As such in-person training may counter a potential source of variability which has been the incorrect determination of centerline [20,22].…”
Section: Discussionmentioning
confidence: 92%
“…Involving the segmentation process, there may have been some errors in exclusion of hard-to-detect, soft plaque when segmenting the calcification from the vasculature, thus altering the diameter. We cross-validated this process between two users to avoid significant errors [31]. In addition, in the process of small branch and segmentation artifact elimination, we sculpted the mesh within Autodesk Meshmixer manipulating single triangular vertices, which might have created minor geometric alteration.…”
Section: Discussionmentioning
confidence: 99%