Computed Sonography: Requiem to Echogenicity Assessment?

Gynecologic and Obstetric Investigation

Volumn 44, Issue 4, 1997, Pages 244-248

  Blickstein, Isaac ^a   Smith Levitin, Michelle ^b   Gwewitsch, Edith ^c   Streltzhoff, Jane ^c   Goldman, Ran D ^a   Chervenak, Frank A ^c  

^a KAPLAN HOSPITAL   (Israel)

^b NORTH SHORE UNIVERSITY HOSPITAL   (United States)

^c WEILL CORNELL MEDICAL CENTER   (United States)

Author keywords

Echogenicity assessment; Fetal liver, computed sonography; Image density; Ultrasound

Indexed keywords

ARTICLE; DENSITOMETRY; ECHOGRAPHY; FETUS; FETUS LIVER; HUMAN; PRIORITY JOURNAL;

EID: 0030665278     PISSN: 03787346     EISSN: 1423002X     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1159/000291537     Document Type: Article

References (13)

1. Smith-Levithin M, Blickstein I, Gurewitsch E: Tissue echogenicity; Chervenak FA, Kurjak A (eds): Current Perspectives on the Fetus as a Patient. Camforth Parthenon Publishing 1996; 8:89-101.
2. Caspi B, Blickstein I, Appelman Z: The accuracy of the assessment of normal fetal intestinal echogenicity: Electro-optical densitometry versus the ultrasonographer’s eye. Gynecol Obstet Invest 1992;33:26-30.
3. Lamont AC, Gracbc AC, Pelmore JM, Thompson JR: Ultrasound assessment of renal cortical brightness in infants: Is naked eye evaluation reliable? Invest Radiol 1990;25:250-253.
4. Eggert P, Debus F, Kreller-Laugwitz G, Oppermann HC: Densitometrie measurements of renal echogenicity in infants and naked eye evaluation: A comparison. Pediatr Radiol 1991;21: 111-113.
5. Blickstein I: Quantitative assessment of sonographic image echogenicity by transmission densitometry: Fetal liver model. J Ultrasound Med 1993;12:567-571.
6. Blickstein I, Goldman R: The relation between different system gain settings and the accuracy of densitométrie assessment of echogenicity. J. Ultrasound Med 1994;13:675-678.
7. Chambers AM: Advanced system optimization for gray scale imaging. Acuson Reg Educ Semin 1994:28-30.
8. Carson PL, Meyer CR, Bowerman RA: Prediction of fetal lung maturity with ultrasound. Radiology 1985; 155:533.
9. Slotnick RN, Abuhamad AY: Prognostic analysis of fetal echogenic bowel. Lancet 1996;347: 85-87.
10. Hill LM, Fries J, Hecker J, Grzybek P: Second-trimester echogenic small bowel: An increased risk for adverse perinatal outcome. Prenat Diagn 1994;14:845-850.
11. Bromley B, Doubilet P, Frigoletto FD, Krauss C, Estroff JA. Benacerraf BR: Is fetal echogenic bowel on second-trimester sonogram an indication for amniocentesis? Obstet Gynecol 1994; 83:647-651.
12. Blickstein I, Goldchmit R, Strano SD, Goldman RD: Quantitative comparison of two distinct echogenicities appearing on the same image using gain-assisted densitométrie evaluation of sonograms (GADES). J Ultrasound Med 1995;14:509-513.
13. Smith-Levitin M, Blickstein I, Albrecht Shach AA, Goldman RD, Gurewitsch E, Streltzoff J, Chervenak FA: Quantitative assessment of gray level perception: Observer’s accuracy is dependent on density differences. Ultrasound Obstet Gynecol 1997, in press.