Table 2.
Comparison between cardiac magnetic resonance (CMR) and three-dimensional (3D) auto right ventricular (RV) quantification with or without manual editing.
| Variable | Novel software (n = 149) | CMR (n = 149) | Correlation | p-Value | Bias | LOA |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| RVEF (%) | ||||||
| 3D auto RV | 38.9 (27.6–50.1) | 34.0 (17.5–44.5) | r = 0.781 | <0.0001 | 6.8 | 19.2 (−12.4 to 26.0) |
| 3D auto edit | 35.6 (22.9–45.6) | 34.0 (17.5–44.5) | r = 0.941 | <0.0001 | 2.6 | 10.2 (−7.6 to 12.8) |
| RVEDV (ml) | ||||||
| 3D auto RV | 112.9 (84.6–150.0) | 119.8 (91.1–175.8) | r = 0.794 | <0.0001 | −17.8 | 94.8 (−112.6 to 77.0) |
| 3D auto edit | 116.9 (88.6–148.9) | 119.8 (91.1–175.8) | r = 0.924 | <0.0001 | −12.3 | 66.8 (−79.1 to 54.5) |
| RVESV (ml) | ||||||
| 3D auto RV | 64.7 (42.9–110.3) | 78.1 (51.7–147.7) | r = 0.854 | <0.0001 | −23.6 | 93.6 (−117.2 to 70.0) |
| 3D auto edit | 73.6 (48.1–113.7) | 78.1 (51.7–147.7) | r = 0.955 | <0.0001 | −13.8 | 59.9 (−73.7 to 46.1) |
Data are expressed as median and interquartile range. LOA, limit of agreement.