Comparison of automated versus semi-automated methods
Five hundred and thirty-eight datasets were used for automated and semi-automated methods comparison from all centers. Bland-Altman analysis showed wide limit of agreement (LOA) between the automated versus semi-automated contouring of the 3D LV datasets. The bias (LOA) for EDV, ESV, SV, and EF were -0.56% (-32.25 to 31.13), 1.01 (-29.94 to 31.96), -1.73 (-18.12 to 14.65), and -1.52 (-17.05 to 14.01) respectively (Table 2). Sub-analysis of the inter-center reproducibility for LV volumes and function between the core lab and other centers using the automated method showed a bigger bias and LOA than the semi-automated methods (Table 2). The inter-center reproducibility for LV volumes and EF showed less bias and LOA between the core lab and other centers using semi-automated contouring (Figure 1 and Table 2). The percent difference using the automated and semi-automated methods for LV EDV, ESV, and SV were summarized in Figure 2. The mean percentage difference in EDV and ESV are higher using the automated method compared to the semi-automated method. The mean absolute percent difference in 3D LV EF between all centers was 7.4±5.4%. Figure 3 shows the Bland-Altman analysis percent difference of the core lab and other centers using the semi-automated method in ages 0-4 years, 5-9 years, 10-14 years, and 15-18 years of age respectively.