File Download

There are no files associated with this item.

  Links for fulltext
     (May Require Subscription)
Supplementary

Article: Fetal biometry by an inexperienced operator using two- and three-dimensional ultrasound

TitleFetal biometry by an inexperienced operator using two- and three-dimensional ultrasound
Authors
Keywords2D Ultrasound
3D Ultrasound
Biometry
Fetal
Issue Date2010
PublisherJohn Wiley & Sons Ltd. The Journal's web site is located at http://www.interscience.wiley.com/jpages/0960-7692/
Citation
Ultrasound In Obstetrics And Gynecology, 2010, v. 35 n. 5, p. 566-571 How to Cite?
AbstractObjective To compare the reproducibility, accuracy and time required for fetal biometric measurements using two-dimensional (2D) and three-dimensional (3D) ultrasonography by an inexperienced operator. Methods Fifty consecutive fetuses were evaluated at a gestational age of 17-34 weeks. For every fetus measurements - including biparietal diameter (BPD), head circumference (HC), abdominal circumference (AC) and femur length (FL) - were made by an inexperienced operator using 2D ultrasound and then saved 3D volumes. As a control, measurements were also made by an experienced operator using 2D ultrasonography alone. Each fetal biometric parameter was measured twice by each operator. All images were assessed by two experienced reviewers, blinded to the operator's identity, using a scoring system based on objective evaluation criteria. Results The interobserver, intraobserver and intermethod variability for 2D ultrasonography by the experienced operator (2D-exp), and 2D and 3D ultra- sonography by the inexperienced operator (2D-inexp and 3D-inexp) was small (all intraclass correlation coefficients ≥ 0.991). A non-significantly higher proportion of fetal biometric measurements by 3D-inexp than 2D-inexp were within 1 mm of the measurements by 2D-exp. There were no differences in the mean image quality scores of fetal biometry between 2D-exp and 2D-inexp, 2D-exp and 3D- inexp. However, the quality score of AC images obtained by 3D-inexp was greater than that obtained by 2D-inexp (5.5 vs. 5.3, P = 0.018). The mean time required to measure BPD, HC, AC and FL was less for 3D-inexp than for 2D-inexp (67.2 vs. 97.0 s, 64.6 vs. 97.0 s, 60.1 vs. 81.5 s and 65.5 vs. 95.1 s, respectively; all P < 0.001), but was significantly greater than for 2D-exp, with corresponding figures of 24.3, 24.3, 27.9 and 27.2 s. Conclusion Fetal biometric measurements obtained by an inexperienced operator using both 2D and 3D ultrasound were reproducible and showed good agreement with those obtained by an experienced operator. The use of 3D ultrasound by an inexperienced operator allows faster measurements to be made than by 2D ultrasound and also seems to facilitate the acquisition of higher-quality images for measurement of AC. Copyright © 2010 ISUOG.
Persistent Identifierhttp://hdl.handle.net/10722/180697
ISSN
2015 Impact Factor: 4.197
2015 SCImago Journal Rankings: 1.766
ISI Accession Number ID
References

 

DC FieldValueLanguage
dc.contributor.authorYang, Fen_US
dc.contributor.authorLeung, KYen_US
dc.contributor.authorLee, YPen_US
dc.contributor.authorChan, HYen_US
dc.contributor.authorTang, MHYen_US
dc.date.accessioned2013-01-28T01:41:12Z-
dc.date.available2013-01-28T01:41:12Z-
dc.date.issued2010en_US
dc.identifier.citationUltrasound In Obstetrics And Gynecology, 2010, v. 35 n. 5, p. 566-571en_US
dc.identifier.issn0960-7692en_US
dc.identifier.urihttp://hdl.handle.net/10722/180697-
dc.description.abstractObjective To compare the reproducibility, accuracy and time required for fetal biometric measurements using two-dimensional (2D) and three-dimensional (3D) ultrasonography by an inexperienced operator. Methods Fifty consecutive fetuses were evaluated at a gestational age of 17-34 weeks. For every fetus measurements - including biparietal diameter (BPD), head circumference (HC), abdominal circumference (AC) and femur length (FL) - were made by an inexperienced operator using 2D ultrasound and then saved 3D volumes. As a control, measurements were also made by an experienced operator using 2D ultrasonography alone. Each fetal biometric parameter was measured twice by each operator. All images were assessed by two experienced reviewers, blinded to the operator's identity, using a scoring system based on objective evaluation criteria. Results The interobserver, intraobserver and intermethod variability for 2D ultrasonography by the experienced operator (2D-exp), and 2D and 3D ultra- sonography by the inexperienced operator (2D-inexp and 3D-inexp) was small (all intraclass correlation coefficients ≥ 0.991). A non-significantly higher proportion of fetal biometric measurements by 3D-inexp than 2D-inexp were within 1 mm of the measurements by 2D-exp. There were no differences in the mean image quality scores of fetal biometry between 2D-exp and 2D-inexp, 2D-exp and 3D- inexp. However, the quality score of AC images obtained by 3D-inexp was greater than that obtained by 2D-inexp (5.5 vs. 5.3, P = 0.018). The mean time required to measure BPD, HC, AC and FL was less for 3D-inexp than for 2D-inexp (67.2 vs. 97.0 s, 64.6 vs. 97.0 s, 60.1 vs. 81.5 s and 65.5 vs. 95.1 s, respectively; all P < 0.001), but was significantly greater than for 2D-exp, with corresponding figures of 24.3, 24.3, 27.9 and 27.2 s. Conclusion Fetal biometric measurements obtained by an inexperienced operator using both 2D and 3D ultrasound were reproducible and showed good agreement with those obtained by an experienced operator. The use of 3D ultrasound by an inexperienced operator allows faster measurements to be made than by 2D ultrasound and also seems to facilitate the acquisition of higher-quality images for measurement of AC. Copyright © 2010 ISUOG.en_US
dc.languageengen_US
dc.publisherJohn Wiley & Sons Ltd. The Journal's web site is located at http://www.interscience.wiley.com/jpages/0960-7692/en_US
dc.relation.ispartofUltrasound in Obstetrics and Gynecologyen_US
dc.subject2D Ultrasounden_US
dc.subject3D Ultrasounden_US
dc.subjectBiometryen_US
dc.subjectFetalen_US
dc.titleFetal biometry by an inexperienced operator using two- and three-dimensional ultrasounden_US
dc.typeArticleen_US
dc.identifier.emailTang, MHY: mhytang@hkucc.hku.hken_US
dc.identifier.authorityTang, MHY=rp01701en_US
dc.description.naturelink_to_subscribed_fulltexten_US
dc.identifier.doi10.1002/uog.7600en_US
dc.identifier.pmid20183864-
dc.identifier.scopuseid_2-s2.0-77951819824en_US
dc.relation.referenceshttp://www.scopus.com/mlt/select.url?eid=2-s2.0-77951819824&selection=ref&src=s&origin=recordpageen_US
dc.identifier.volume35en_US
dc.identifier.issue5en_US
dc.identifier.spage566en_US
dc.identifier.epage571en_US
dc.identifier.isiWOS:000278210600011-
dc.publisher.placeUnited Kingdomen_US
dc.identifier.scopusauthoridYang, F=35363141900en_US
dc.identifier.scopusauthoridLeung, KY=8247106900en_US
dc.identifier.scopusauthoridLee, YP=15033545100en_US
dc.identifier.scopusauthoridChan, HY=7403402562en_US
dc.identifier.scopusauthoridTang, MHY=35362943900en_US

Export via OAI-PMH Interface in XML Formats


OR


Export to Other Non-XML Formats