Sonographic measurement of cervical volume in nonpregnant women using the geometric formula for a cylinder versus the three-dimensional automated virtual organ computer-aided analysis (VOCAL)

Journal of Clinical Ultrasound

Volumn 39, Issue 6, 2011, Pages 322-328

  Papoutsis, Dimitrios ^a   Daskalakis, George ^a   Antonakou, Angeliki ^a   Rodolakis, Alexandros ^a   Mesogitis, Spiridon ^a   Antsaklis, Aris ^a  

^a UNIVERSITY OF ATHENS   (Greece)

Author keywords

Cylinder geometric formula; Ultrasound; Uterine cervix; VOCAL; Volume measurement

Indexed keywords

ADULT; ARTICLE; COMPUTER SIMULATION; ECHOGRAPHY; FEMALE; HISTOLOGY; HUMAN; OBSERVER VARIATION; ORGAN SIZE; THREE DIMENSIONAL IMAGING; UTERINE CERVIX;

ADULT; CERVIX UTERI; COMPUTER SIMULATION; FEMALE; HUMANS; IMAGING, THREE-DIMENSIONAL; OBSERVER VARIATION; ORGAN SIZE;

EID: 79958233892     PISSN: 00912751     EISSN: 10970096     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1002/jcu.20833     Document Type: Article

References (15)

1. Rozenberg P, Rafii A, Sénat MV, et al. Predictive value of two-dimensional and three-dimensional multiplanar ultrasound evaluation of the cervix in preterm labor. J Matern Fetal Neonatal Med 2003; 13: 237.
2. Dilek TU, Gurbuz A, Yazici G, et al. Comparison of cervical volume and cervical length to predict preterm delivery by transvaginal ultrasound. Am J Perinatol 2006; 23: 167.
3. Kyrgiou M, Koliopoulos G, Martin-Hirsch P, et al. Obstetric outcomes after conservative treatment for intraepithelial or early invasive cervical lesions: systematic review and meta-analysis. Lancet 2006; 367: 489.
4. Dumanli H, Fielding JR, Gering DT, et al. Volume assessment of the normal female cervix with MR imaging: comparison of the segmentation technique and two geometric formula. Acad Radiol 2000; 7: 502.
5. Rovio PH, Luukkaala T, Vuento M, et al. Ultrasonographic assessment of weight of the myomatous uterus: a pilot study using a new combined geometrical formula. Eur J Obstet Gynecol Reprod Biol 2008; 137: 193.
6. Bartlett JW, Frost C. Reliability, repeatability and reproducibility: analysis of measurement errors in continuous variables. Ultrasound Obstet Gynecol 2008; 31: 466.
7. Bland JM, Altman DG. Statistical methods for assessing agreement between two methods of clinical measurement. Lancet 1986; 1: 307.
8. Cook CM, Ellwood DA. A longitudinal study of the cervix in pregnancy using transvaginal ultrasound. Br J Obstet Gynaecol 1996; 103: 16.
9. To MS, Skentou C, Liao AW, et al. Cervical length and funneling at 23 weeks of gestation in the prediction of spontaneous early preterm delivery. Ultrasound Obstet Gynecol 2001; 18: 200.
10. Guzman ER, Walters C, Ananth CV, et al. A comparison of sonographic cervical parameters in predicting spontaneous preterm birth in high-risk singleton gestations. Ultrasound Obstet Gynecol 2001; 18: 204.
11. Rovas L, Sladkevicius P, Strobel E, et al. Intraobserver and interobserver reproducibility of three-dimensional gray-scale and power Doppler ultrasound examinations of the cervix in pregnant women. Ultrasound Obstet Gynecol 2005; 26: 132.
12. Basgul A, Kavak ZN, Bakirci N, et al. Three-dimensional ultrasound power Doppler assessment of the cervix: comparison between nulliparas and multiparas. J Perinat Med 2007; 35: 48.
13. Kusanovic JP, Nien JK, Goncalves LF, et al. The use of inversion mode and 3D manual segmentation in volume measurement of fetal fluid-filled structures: comparison with Virtual Organ Computer-aided AnaLysis (VOCAL). Ultrasound Obstet Gynecol 2008; 31: 177.
14. Raine-Fenning N, Campbell B, Collier J, et al. The reproducibility of endometrial volume acquisition and measurement with the VOCAL-imaging program. Ultrasound Obstet Gynecol 2002; 19: 69.
15. Raine-Fenning NJ, Clewes JS, Kendall NR, et al. The interobserver reliability and validity of volume calculation from three-dimensional ultrasound datasets in the in vitro setting. Ultrasound Obstet Gynecol 2003; 21: 283.