| Literature DB >> 26217596 |
Hyewon Hur1, Young Han Kim1, Hee Young Cho1, Yong Won Park1, Hye-Sung Won2, Mi-Young Lee2, Bo Hyon Yun1, Kwang Hee Lee3, Sung Yoon Kim3, Junsang Yoo3, Ja-Young Kwon1.
Abstract
OBJECTIVE: To evaluate the feasibility of five-dimensional Long Bone (5D LB), a new technique that automatically archives, reconstructs images, and measures lengths of fetal long bones, to assess whether the direction of volume sweep influences fetal long bone measurements in three-dimensional (3D) ultrasound and 5D LB, and to compare measurements of fetal long bone lengths obtained with 5D LB and those obtained with conventional two-dimensional (2D) and manual 3D techniques.Entities:
Keywords: 5D Long Bone; Fetal biometry; Fetal long bone; Three-dimensional ultrasound; Two-dimensional ultrasound
Year: 2015 PMID: 26217596 PMCID: PMC4515475 DOI: 10.5468/ogs.2015.58.4.268
Source DB: PubMed Journal: Obstet Gynecol Sci ISSN: 2287-8572
Fig. 1Three-dimensional ultrasound images showing the initial planes for three-dimensional volume acquisition of femur longitudinal-90 (A), femur longitudinal-45 (B), and the tibia and fibula (C).
Fig. 2Long bone measurement by five-dimensional Long Bone. The three-dimensional volume data were displayed in the multiplanar mode (A) and the five-dimensional Long Bone set key was pressed. The system reconstructed a three-dimensional image of the long bones and the length of the long bone was measured automatically (B).
Success rate, error rate and fail rate of measurements of the femur (longitudinal-90 and longitudinal-45), tibia and fibula by five-dimensional Long Bone
Values are presented as n (%).
Comparison of femur length measurement by 3D-US and 5D LB in relation to volume sweeping angles.
3D-US, three-dimensional ultrasound; 5D LB, five-dimensional Long Bone; diff, difference between pairs of measurements; SD, standard deviation; CI, confidence interval; ICC, interclass correlation coefficient.
Intra-observer agreement in long bone measurement for each technique: 2D-US, 3D-US, and 5D LB
2D-US, two-dimensional ultrasound; 3D-US, three-dimensional ultrasound; 5D LB, five-dimensional Long Bone; SD, standard deviation; CI, confidence interval; diff, difference between pairs of measurements; ICC, interclass correlation coefficient.
Inter-obserever agreement in Long Bone measurement for each technique: 2D-US, 3D-US, and 5D LB
2D-US, two-dimensional ultrasound; 3D-US, three-dimensional ultrasound; 5D LB, five dimensional Long Bone; diff, difference between pairs of measurements; SD, standard deviation; CI, confidence interval; ICC, interclass correlation coefficient.
Comparison of Long Bone measurement techniques by comparing 3D-US and 5D LB measurements with the 2D-US measurements
3D-US, three-dimensional ultrasound; 5D LB, five-dimensional Long Bone; 2D-US, two-dimensional ultrasound; diff, difference between pairs of measurements; SD, standard deviation; CI, confidence interval; ICC, interclass correlation coefficient.
Fig. 3Bland-Altman plots showing variability in long bone lengths measurements using two-dimensional ultrasound (2D-US) and three-dimensional ultrasound (3D-US) (A-C), 2D-US, and five-dimensional Long Bone (5D LB) (D-F). SD, standard deviation.
Comparison of Long Bone measurement techniques by comparing 3D-US and 5D LB measurements with the 2D-US measurements
3D-US, three-dimensional ultrasound; 5D LB, five-dimensional Long Bone; 2D-US, two-dimensional ultrasound; CI, confidence interval.