Literature DB >> 9060130

Fetal heart volume assessment by three-dimensional ultrasound.

F M Chang1, K F Hsu, H C Ko, B L Yao, C H Chang, C H Yu, R I Liang, H Y Chen.   

Abstract

Heart volume may provide important information on the status of fetal hemodynamics. However, traditionally fetal heart volume has been assessed with the erroneous assumption that the fetal heart is spherical or elliptical. With the advent of three-dimensional ultrasound, accurate assessment of organ volume has become feasible. The objectives of this study were to compare the reproducibility of two-dimensional ultrasound and three-dimensional ultrasound in the assessment of heart volume, and to test whether heart volume assessed by the traditional method of two-dimensional ultrasound equates to that assessed by three-dimensional ultrasound. If it proved to be significantly different, we aimed to find a new constant which, if incorporated into the traditional formula used to determine heart volume, would enable us to achieve more accurate volumes with two-dimensional ultrasound. In total, 50 normal singleton fetuses ranging from 20 to 30 weeks' gestation were included in the study. Both the traditional two-dimensional and the new three-dimensional volume measurements were compared. The results showed that three-dimensional ultrasound has a better reproducibility than two-dimensional ultrasound in heart volume assessment and that heart volume assessed by the traditional formula of two-dimensional ultrasound is significantly larger than that measured by three-dimensional ultrasound (p < 0.001). We therefore propose that, if the traditional two-dimensional equation is to be used, the constant for heart volume could be modified to 0.4563 (SE = 0.0153, n = 50) to achieve more accurate results. With this new constant, the heart volume derived by two-dimensional ultrasound was not found to differ from that measured by three-dimensional ultrasound. From our series, we conclude that three-dimensional ultrasound is theoretically the best method for the assessment of heart volume. However, because of the limitations of three-dimensional ultrasound (i.e. it is not routinely available, it is more expensive and more time-consuming) two-dimensional ultrasound in practical terms should be the method of choice. Although we were able to improve the accuracy of the heart volume measurements using a new constant in the traditional two-dimensional formula, the new constant will not improve variability, which can only be reduced by three-dimensional ultrasound.

Mesh:

Year:  1997        PMID: 9060130     DOI: 10.1046/j.1469-0705.1997.09010042.x

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Ultrasound Obstet Gynecol        ISSN: 0960-7692            Impact factor:   7.299


  14 in total

1.  Reproducibility of fetal heart volume by 3D-sonography using the XI VOCAL method.

Authors:  Enoch Q Barreto; Hérbene F Milani; Edward Araujo Júnior; Karina K Haratz; Liliam C Rolo; Luciano M Nardozza; Hélio A Guimarães Filho; Antonio F Moron
Journal:  Cardiovasc Ultrasound       Date:  2010-05-12       Impact factor: 2.062

2.  Imaging comparison of basic cardiac views between two- and three-dimensional ultrasound in normal fetuses in anterior spine positions.

Authors:  Po-Hui Wang; Gin-Den Chen; Long-Yau Lin
Journal:  Int J Cardiovasc Imaging       Date:  2002-02       Impact factor: 2.357

Review 3.  Three- and 4-dimensional ultrasound in obstetric practice: does it help?

Authors:  Luís F Gonçalves; Wesley Lee; Jimmy Espinoza; Roberto Romero
Journal:  J Ultrasound Med       Date:  2005-12       Impact factor: 2.153

4.  A novel algorithm for comprehensive fetal echocardiography using 4-dimensional ultrasonography and tomographic imaging.

Authors:  Jimmy Espinoza; Juan Pedro Kusanovic; Luís F Gonçalves; Jyh Kae Nien; Sonia Hassan; Wesley Lee; Roberto Romero
Journal:  J Ultrasound Med       Date:  2006-08       Impact factor: 2.153

5.  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).

Authors:  J P Kusanovic; J K Nien; L F Gonçalves; J Espinoza; W Lee; M Balasubramaniam; E Soto; O Erez; R Romero
Journal:  Ultrasound Obstet Gynecol       Date:  2008-02       Impact factor: 7.299

6.  Standardized views of the fetal heart using four-dimensional sonographic and tomographic imaging.

Authors:  J Espinoza; R Romero; J P Kusanovic; F Gotsch; W Lee; L F Gonçalves; S S Hassan
Journal:  Ultrasound Obstet Gynecol       Date:  2008-02       Impact factor: 7.299

7.  The role of the sagittal view of the ductal arch in identification of fetuses with conotruncal anomalies using 4-dimensional ultrasonography.

Authors:  Jimmy Espinoza; Roberto Romero; Juan Pedro Kusanovic; Francesca Gotsch; Offer Erez; Wesley Lee; Luís F Gonçalves; Mary Lou Schoen; Sonia S Hassan
Journal:  J Ultrasound Med       Date:  2007-09       Impact factor: 2.153

Review 8.  Fetal Physiologically Based Pharmacokinetic Models: Systems Information on the Growth and Composition of Fetal Organs.

Authors:  Khaled Abduljalil; Masoud Jamei; Trevor N Johnson
Journal:  Clin Pharmacokinet       Date:  2019-02       Impact factor: 6.447

9.  The fetal cardiovascular response to increased placental vascular impedance to flow determined with 4-dimensional ultrasound using spatiotemporal image correlation and virtual organ computer-aided analysis.

Authors:  Neil Hamill; Roberto Romero; Sonia Hassan; Wesley Lee; Stephen A Myers; Pooja Mittal; Juan Pedro Kusanovic; Mamtha Balasubramaniam; Tinnakorn Chaiworapongsa; Edi Vaisbuch; Jimmy Espinoza; Francesca Gotsch; Luis F Goncalves; Shali Mazaki-Tovi; Offer Erez; Edgar Hernandez-Andrade; Lami Yeo
Journal:  Am J Obstet Gynecol       Date:  2012-12-07       Impact factor: 8.661

10.  Four-dimensional ultrasonography of the fetal heart using a novel Tomographic Ultrasound Imaging display.

Authors:  Luís F Gonçalves; Jimmy Espinoza; Roberto Romero; Juan Pedro Kusanovic; Betsy Swope; Jyh Kae Nien; Offer Erez; Eleazar Soto; Marjorie C Treadwell
Journal:  J Perinat Med       Date:  2006       Impact factor: 1.901

View more

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.