Skip to main content
. Author manuscript; available in PMC: 2019 Jan 1.
Published in final edited form as: J Electrocardiol. 2017 Sep 1;51(1):60–67. doi: 10.1016/j.jelectrocard.2017.08.035

Table 1.

Hausdorff distance in the study participants.

Patient
ID
Imaging
type
Gender Minimum
distance
(mm)
Maximum
distance
(mm)
Mean
distance
(mm)
RMS_dis
(mm)
Min (%) Max (%) Mean(%) RMS(%)
101 MRI m 0.000046 55.92 9.99 13.66 0 11.8 2.11 2.89
102 MRI m 0.000397 56.22 17.52 21.031 0.0001 10.64 3.33 3.98
103 MRI m 0.00015 44.84 13.62 16.11 0 8.6 2.62 3.1
104 MRI m 0.0008 39.77 9.92 12.84 0 7.5 1.8 2.4
105 MRI f 0.00015 38.62 8.51 11.4 0 7.5 1.6 2.2
106 CT m 0.00015 44.05 10.55 12.7 0 8.2 1.9 2.3
107 CT f 0.000001 70.37 13.96 18.07 0 10.53 2.09 2.7
108 CT m 0.00031 125.06 8.85 11.14 0 21.26 1.5 1.89
109 MRI m 0.00053 44.29 10.35 13.72 0 8.5 1.9 2.63
110 CT m 0.00015 115.82 10.95 17.56 0 19.47 1.84 2.95
111 CT m 0.000001 51.04 8.31 11.38 0 8.36 1.6 1.86
112 CT f 0.000001 49.49 10.27 12.75 0 8.55 1.77 2.2
113 CT m 0.00015 50.41 7.54 10.64 0 8.47 1.26 1.79
114 CT f 0.00015 104.22 16.13 19.27 0 14.79 2.28 2.73

AVERAGE 0.000213 63.58 11.17643 14.44793 7.14E-06 11.01214 1.971429 2.544286

Hausdorff minimum (Min_dist), maximum (Max_dist), mean (Mean_dist) and root median square (RMS_dist) distance in millimeters (mm) and percentage (%) of each patient.