본문 바로가기
HOME> 논문 > 논문 검색상세

논문 상세정보

Journal of reconstructive microsurgery v.34 no.1, 2018년, pp.029 - 034   SCIE
본 등재정보는 저널의 등재정보를 참고하여 보여주는 베타서비스로 정확한 논문의 등재여부는 등재기관에 확인하시기 바랍니다.

Agreement between Perometry and Sequential Arm Circumference Measurements in Objective Determination of Arm Volume

Batista, Bernardo (Breast Unit, Hospital Sírio Libanês, São Paulo, Brazil ) ; Baiocchi, Jaqueline (Department of Cutaneous Oncology, AC Camargo Cancer Center, São Paulo, Brazil ) ; Campanholi, Larissa (Department of Cutaneous Oncology, AC Camargo Cancer Center, São Paulo, Brazil ) ; Bergmann, Anke (Molecular Carcinogenesis Program, Instituto Nacional do Câncer – ) ; Duprat, João (INCA/MS, Rio de Janeiro, Brazil ) ;
  • 초록  

    Background Limb circumference measurements (CM) and perometry are the preferred methods for objectively measuring arm volume in lymphedema surgery research. Understanding the measurement bias involved in these measuring systems is important to properly interpret and compare studies and their results. Methods Arm volumes from 91 patients were measured using sequential girths and the truncated cone formula (CM) and with the use of an automated perometer (perometry). The absolute volume of the largest arm (V), the volume difference between the arms (VD), and the relative difference between them (percentage of excess volume [PEV]) were calculated with both methods. The agreement between methods was assessed by the Pearson's correlation test and the Bland–Altman's method. Results Correlations were strong for V (r = 0.99), VD (r = 88), and PEV (r = 0.86). Volumes measured by perometry were, on average, 10.6 mL smaller than volumes calculated from CM, while their limits of agreement (LOA) ranged from −202 to 181 mL. The LOA represents the range we could expect the arm volumes measured with the two methods to differ by chance alone, 95% of the times. For VD, LOA was −101 to 141 mL, with a mean difference of 19.9 mL, while PEV had a mean difference of 0.9%, with LOA ranging from −5 to 6.8%. Conclusion There is considerable measurement error between arm volume estimated by perometry and by CM. Volumes calculated with these methods should be compared with caution. Furthermore, we observed an increasingly relevant measurement bias in outcomes that are mathematically derived from arm volumes.


 활용도 분석

  • 상세보기

    amChart 영역
  • 원문보기

    amChart 영역

원문보기

무료다운로드
  • 원문이 없습니다.
유료다운로드

유료 다운로드의 경우 해당 사이트의 정책에 따라 신규 회원가입, 로그인, 유료 구매 등이 필요할 수 있습니다. 해당 사이트에서 발생하는 귀하의 모든 정보활동은 NDSL의 서비스 정책과 무관합니다.

원문복사신청을 하시면, 일부 해외 인쇄학술지의 경우 외국학술지지원센터(FRIC)에서
무료 원문복사 서비스를 제공합니다.

NDSL에서는 해당 원문을 복사서비스하고 있습니다. 위의 원문복사신청 또는 장바구니 담기를 통하여 원문복사서비스 이용이 가능합니다.

이 논문과 함께 출판된 논문 + 더보기