OBJECTIVES: To define a protocol for the first-trimester assessment of uterine artery pulsatility index (UtA-PI) using the new transverse technique, to evaluate UtA-PI measured using the transverse approach vs that obtained using the conventional sagittal approach and to determine if accelerated onsite training (in both methods) of inexperienced sonographers can achieve reproducible UtA-PI measurements comparable with those obtained by an experienced sonographer. METHODS: This was a prospective observational study of women with a singleton pregnancy attending for routine combined first-trimester screening at 11 to 13 + 6 weeks' gestation. The study consisted of two parts, each conducted at a different center (Part 1 in Calgary, Canada and Part 2 in Hong Kong). In Part 1, UtA-PI measurements were performed using the transverse and sagittal techniques by four sonographers trained in both methods, in 10 cases each, and measurement indices (PI), time required and subjective difficulty in obtaining satisfactory measurements were compared. The one sample t-test and Wilcoxon signed rank test were used when appropriate. Bland-Altman plots were used to assess measurement agreement, and intraclass correlation coefficient (ICC) was used to evaluate measurement reliability. A target plot was used to assess measures of central tendency and dispersion. In Part 2, one experienced and three inexperienced sonographers prospectively measured UtA-PI using both approaches in 42 and 35 women, respectively. Inexperienced sonographers underwent accelerated onsite training by the experienced sonographer. Measurement approach and sonographer order were on a random basis. ICC, Bland-Altman and Passing-Bablok analyses were performed to assess measurement agreement and reliability and effect of accelerated training. RESULTS: In Part 1, no difference was observed between the two techniques in mean time to acquire the measurements (118 s for sagittal vs 106 s for transverse; P = 0.38). The four sonographers reported that the transverse technique was subjectively easier to perform (P = 0.04). Bias and ICC for mean UtA-PI between sagittal and transverse measurements were -0.05 (95% limits of agreement, -0.48 to 0.37) and 0.94, respectively. Measurements obtained using the transverse technique after correcting for gestational age were significantly closer to the expected distribution than those obtained using the sagittal technique. In Part 2, there were no significant differences in median UtA-PI measured using the different approaches for both experienced and inexperienced sonographers (P > 0.05 for all sonographers). Mean UtA-PI measurement reliability between approaches was high for the experienced (ICC = 0.92) and inexperienced (ICC > 0.80) sonographers. UtA-PI measurement approaches did not deviate from linearity, while bias ranged from -0.10 to 0.07. The median time required was similar between the techniques (56.1 s for sagittal vs 49.3 s for transverse; P = 0.054). CONCLUSIONS: This novel transverse approach for the measurement of UtA-PI in the first trimester appears to be comparable with the sagittal approach in terms of reliability, reproducibility and time required, and may be easier to perform. Providing accelerated onsite training can be helpful for improving the reliability of UtA-PI measurements and could potentially facilitate the broad implementation of first-trimester pre-eclampsia screening.
OBJECTIVES: To define a protocol for the first-trimester assessment of uterine artery pulsatility index (UtA-PI) using the new transverse technique, to evaluate UtA-PI measured using the transverse approach vs that obtained using the conventional sagittal approach and to determine if accelerated onsite training (in both methods) of inexperienced sonographers can achieve reproducible UtA-PI measurements comparable with those obtained by an experienced sonographer. METHODS: This was a prospective observational study of women with a singleton pregnancy attending for routine combined first-trimester screening at 11 to 13 + 6 weeks' gestation. The study consisted of two parts, each conducted at a different center (Part 1 in Calgary, Canada and Part 2 in Hong Kong). In Part 1, UtA-PI measurements were performed using the transverse and sagittal techniques by four sonographers trained in both methods, in 10 cases each, and measurement indices (PI), time required and subjective difficulty in obtaining satisfactory measurements were compared. The one sample t-test and Wilcoxon signed rank test were used when appropriate. Bland-Altman plots were used to assess measurement agreement, and intraclass correlation coefficient (ICC) was used to evaluate measurement reliability. A target plot was used to assess measures of central tendency and dispersion. In Part 2, one experienced and three inexperienced sonographers prospectively measured UtA-PI using both approaches in 42 and 35 women, respectively. Inexperienced sonographers underwent accelerated onsite training by the experienced sonographer. Measurement approach and sonographer order were on a random basis. ICC, Bland-Altman and Passing-Bablok analyses were performed to assess measurement agreement and reliability and effect of accelerated training. RESULTS: In Part 1, no difference was observed between the two techniques in mean time to acquire the measurements (118 s for sagittal vs 106 s for transverse; P = 0.38). The four sonographers reported that the transverse technique was subjectively easier to perform (P = 0.04). Bias and ICC for mean UtA-PI between sagittal and transverse measurements were -0.05 (95% limits of agreement, -0.48 to 0.37) and 0.94, respectively. Measurements obtained using the transverse technique after correcting for gestational age were significantly closer to the expected distribution than those obtained using the sagittal technique. In Part 2, there were no significant differences in median UtA-PI measured using the different approaches for both experienced and inexperienced sonographers (P > 0.05 for all sonographers). Mean UtA-PI measurement reliability between approaches was high for the experienced (ICC = 0.92) and inexperienced (ICC > 0.80) sonographers. UtA-PI measurement approaches did not deviate from linearity, while bias ranged from -0.10 to 0.07. The median time required was similar between the techniques (56.1 s for sagittal vs 49.3 s for transverse; P = 0.054). CONCLUSIONS: This novel transverse approach for the measurement of UtA-PI in the first trimester appears to be comparable with the sagittal approach in terms of reliability, reproducibility and time required, and may be easier to perform. Providing accelerated onsite training can be helpful for improving the reliability of UtA-PI measurements and could potentially facilitate the broad implementation of first-trimester pre-eclampsia screening.