uu.seUppsala University Publications
Change search
ReferencesLink to record
Permanent link

Direct link
Manual or semi-automated edge detection of the maximal far wall common carotid intima-media thickness: a direct comparison
Show others and affiliations
2012 (English)In: Journal of Internal Medicine, ISSN 0954-6820, E-ISSN 1365-2796, Vol. 271, no 3, 247-256 p.Article in journal (Refereed) Published
Abstract [en]

Background: Automated edge detection is thought to be superior to manual edge detection in quantification of the far wall common carotid intima-media thickness (CIMT), yet published evidence making a direct comparison is not available.

Methods: Data were used from the METEOR study, a randomized placebo-controlled trial among 984 individuals showing that rosuvastatin attenuated the rate of change of 2 year change in CIMT among low-risk individuals with subclinical atherosclerosis. For this post hoc analysis, CIMT images of the far wall of the common carotid artery were evaluated using manual and semi-automated edge detection and reproducibility, relation to cardiovascular risk factors, rates of change over time and effects of lipid-lowering therapy were assessed.

Results: Reproducibility was high for both reading methods. Direction, magnitude and statistical significance of risk factor relations were similar across methods. Rate of change in CIMT in participants assigned to placebo was 0.0066 mm per year (SE: 0.0027) for manually and 0.0072 mm per year (SE: 0.0029) for semi-automatically read images. The effect of lipid-lowering therapy on CIMT changes was -0.0103 mm per year (SE: 0.0032) for manual reading and -0.0111 mm per year (SE: 0.0034) for semi-automated reading.

Conclusion: Manual and semi-automated readings of the maximal far wall of the common CIMT images both result in high reproducibility, show similar risk factor relations, rates of change and treatment effects. Hence, choices between semi-automated and manual reading software for CIMT studies likely should be based on logistical and cost considerations rather than differences in expected data quality when the choice is made to use far wall common CIMT measurements.

Place, publisher, year, edition, pages
2012. Vol. 271, no 3, 247-256 p.
National Category
Medical and Health Sciences
URN: urn:nbn:se:uu:diva-169445DOI: 10.1111/j.1365-2796.2011.02422.xISI: 000300836300005PubMedID: 21726301OAI: oai:DiVA.org:uu-169445DiVA: diva2:506754
Available from: 2012-02-29 Created: 2012-02-29 Last updated: 2012-05-08Bibliographically approved

Open Access in DiVA

No full text

Other links

Publisher's full textPubMed

Search in DiVA

By author/editor
Lind, Lars
By organisation
Department of Medical Sciences
In the same journal
Journal of Internal Medicine
Medical and Health Sciences

Search outside of DiVA

GoogleGoogle Scholar
The number of downloads is the sum of all downloads of full texts. It may include eg previous versions that are now no longer available

Altmetric score

Total: 160 hits
ReferencesLink to record
Permanent link

Direct link