Table 1.
Characteristics of 147 cases included.
Figure 1.
The correlation coefficients of formula 1/2ABC with CAVA (gold standard).
(A) for cerebellar hemorrhage, the correlation coefficient was 0.980; (B) for brainstem hemorrhage, the correlation coefficient was 0.979; (C) for regular shaped hemorrhage, the correlation coefficient was 0.974; (D) for irregular shaped hemorrhage, the correlation coefficient was 0.976. CAVA, computer-assisted volumetric analysis.
Figure 2.
The correlation coefficients of formula 2/3SH with CAVA (gold standard).
(A) for cerebellar hemorrhage, the correlation coefficient was 0.983; (B) for brainstem hemorrhage, the correlation coefficient was 0.988; (C) for regular shaped hemorrhage, the correlation coefficient was 0.972; (D) for irregular shaped hemorrhage, the correlation coefficient was 0.987. CAVA, computer-assisted volumetric analysis.
Figure 3.
Hematoma volumes (ml) and percentage deviations (%) for total 147 infratentorial hemorrhages calculated by gold standard, formula 1/2ABC and 2/3SH.
(A) the comparison of three methods in hematoma volume was statistically indistinguishable (P = 0.700); (B) formula 1/2ABC and 2/3SH underestimated hematoma volume by −11.59(−23.07, 4.13)% and −6.51(−18.58, 4.88)%, respectively. CAVA, computer-assisted volumetric analysis.
Table 2.
Hematoma volumes, absolute values of volume deviation (ml) and percentage deviation (%) for gold standard, 1/2ABC and 2/3SH in total 147 patients.
Figure 4.
Hematoma volumes (ml) and percentage deviations (%) for cerebellar and brainstem hemorrhages calculated by gold standard, formula 1/2ABC and 2/3SH.
(A) the comparison of three methods in hematoma volume was statistically indistinguishable (P>0.05); (B) formula 1/2ABC and 2/3SH underestimated hematoma volume by −10.34(−20.11, 3.10)% and −4.64(18.31, 3.36)% for cerebellar hemorrhage, −13.69(−27.15, 4.78)% and −8.80(−21.74, 13.88)% for brainstem hemorrhage, respectively.
Table 3.
Hematoma volumes, absolute values of volume deviation (ml) and percentage deviation (%) for gold standard, 1/2ABC and 2/3SH in different locations.
Figure 5.
Hematoma volumes (ml) and percentage deviations (%) for regular, irregular and multilobular hemorrhages calculated by gold standard, formula 1/2ABC and 2/3SH.
(A) the comparison of three methods in hematoma volume was statistically indistinguishable (P>0.05); (B) formula 1/2ABC and 2/3SH underestimated hematoma volume by −18.51(−28.20, −5.80)% and −15.56(−25.85, 3.38)% for regular hemorrhage, −9.26(−20.75, 5.19)% and −3.23(−15.78, 6.17)% for irregular hemorrhage, respectively. However, for the multilobular shaped hemorrhage, the formula 1/2ABC underestimated by −8.53(−16.73, 4.25)% and 2/3SH overestimated only by 1.96(−6.37, 9.68)%.
Table 4.
Hematoma volumes, absolute values of volume deviation (ml) and percentage deviation (%) for gold standard, 1/2ABC and 2/3SH in different shapes.
Table 5.
Hematoma volumes, absolute values of volume deviation (ml) and percentage deviation (%) for gold standard, 1/2ABC and 2/3SH in 34 cases with maximum transverse diameter>3cm.