1naresh
Array
(
[urn:ac.highwire.org:guest:identity] => Array
(
[runtime-id] => urn:ac.highwire.org:guest:identity
[type] => guest
[service-id] => ajnr-ac.highwire.org
[access-type] => Controlled
[privilege] => Array
(
[urn:ac.highwire.org:guest:privilege] => Array
(
[runtime-id] => urn:ac.highwire.org:guest:privilege
[type] => privilege-set
[privilege-set] => GUEST
)
)
[credentials] => Array
(
[method] => guest
)
)
)
1nareshArray
(
[urn:ac.highwire.org:guest:identity] => Array
(
[runtime-id] => urn:ac.highwire.org:guest:identity
[type] => guest
[service-id] => ajnr-ac.highwire.org
[access-type] => Controlled
[privilege] => Array
(
[urn:ac.highwire.org:guest:privilege] => Array
(
[runtime-id] => urn:ac.highwire.org:guest:privilege
[type] => privilege-set
[privilege-set] => GUEST
)
)
[credentials] => Array
(
[method] => guest
)
)
)
Table 2: Comparison of the percentages of areas and thicknesses and overall plaque burden between MRI and histologya
MRI Histology P r ICC (95% CI) Fibrous component area (%) 81.86 ± 10.59 81.87 ± 11.59 .997 0.901 0.898 (0.832–0.938) Lipid core area (%) 19.51 ± 10.76 19.86 ± 11.56 .660 0.888 0.885 (0.804–0.934) Calcification area (%) 9.68 ± 5.21 8.83 ± 5.67 .030 0.933 0.930 (0.745–0.982) Fibrous cap thickness (%) 31.10 ± 11.28 30.83 ± 8.51 .890 0.438 0.421 (0.155–0.630) Plaque burden area (%) 65.18 ± 9.01 52.71 ± 14.58 <.001 0.862 0.771 (0.640–0.858)
Note:—r indicates the Pearson correlation coefficient.
↵a Results are expressed as mean ± SD with P values derived from a linear mixed-effects model.