Nelson T R, Pretorius D H, Lev-Toaff A, Bega G, Budorick N E, Hollenbach K A, Needleman L
Department of Radiology, University of California, San Diego, La Jolla 92014, USA.
J Ultrasound Med. 2001 Sep;20(9):941-52. doi: 10.7863/jum.2001.20.9.941.
To evaluate the feasibility of performing three-dimensional ultrasonographic studies that meet American Institute of Ultrasound in Medicine and American College of Radiology ultrasonographic examination guidelines with review off-line and at remote locations.
One hundred patients were studied at 2 institutions using high-end two-dimensional clinical ultrasonographic scanners and commercially available three-dimensional ultrasonography for a variety of organ systems (first- and second-trimester fetus, abdomen, and female pelvis). We evaluated several parameters, including measurements, completeness of organ visualization, abnormalities identified, image quality, number of volumes required, and discrepancies between interpretations.
Overall, three-dimensional ultrasonography could produce diagnostic-quality results comparable with those of two-dimensional ultrasonography. Three-dimensional ultrasonographic image quality was lower than that of two-dimensional ultrasonography. Two- and three-dimensional ultrasonographic measurements were comparable (<5% difference), as was the extent of organ visualization, although some structures were challenging for both two- and three-dimensional ultrasonography. In general, organs completely imaged in the scanner field of view required 1 to 1.5 volumes, whereas larger organs required between 3 and 6 volumes. Differences among reviewers' interpretations highlighted the need for standardization of acquisition and reviewing protocols for sonographers and physicians.
Our results show that it is clinically feasible to acquire three-dimensional ultrasonographic data at one site and to obtain accurate interpretation by off-line review at another within the context of providing high-quality clinical diagnostic studies.
评估在离线及远程地点进行符合美国医学超声学会和美国放射学会超声检查指南的三维超声研究的可行性。
在2家机构对100例患者使用高端二维临床超声扫描仪和商用三维超声对多种器官系统（孕早期和孕中期胎儿、腹部及女性盆腔）进行研究。我们评估了几个参数，包括测量值、器官可视化的完整性、发现的异常、图像质量、所需容积数量以及解读之间的差异。
总体而言，三维超声能够产生与二维超声相当的诊断质量结果。三维超声图像质量低于二维超声。二维和三维超声测量结果相当（差异<5%），器官可视化程度也是如此，尽管有些结构对二维和三维超声检查来说都具有挑战性。一般来说，在扫描仪视野中完全成像的器官需要1至1.5个容积，而较大的器官需要3至6个容积。审阅者解读之间的差异突出表明，超声检查人员和医生的采集及审阅方案需要标准化。
我们的结果表明，在提供高质量临床诊断研究的背景下，在一个地点采集三维超声数据并在另一个地点通过离线审阅获得准确解读在临床上是可行的。
