Department of Obstetrics and Gynecology, Center for Integral Assistance to Women's Health, State University of Campinas Medical School, Campinas, Brazil.
Ultrasound Obstet Gynecol. 2010 Apr;35(4):417-25. doi: 10.1002/uog.7517.
To evaluate the agreement between multiplanar and Virtual Organ Computer-aided AnaLysis (VOCAL()) techniques for the measurement of total fetal thigh volume and to assess the repeatability and reproducibility of measurements performed using these methods; to derive birth weight-predicting models for both methods and to compare their accuracies.
This was a cross-sectional study of 150 singleton pregnancies at 30-42 weeks of gestation in which ultrasound volumes of the fetal thigh were obtained within 48 hours of delivery and measured using multiplanar and VOCAL techniques. Bland-Altman analyses were performed to determine the agreement between the two methods, and to evaluate intraobserver and interobserver variability in a subset of 40 patients. Birth weight-predicting models were derived using total fetal thigh volumes obtained using the VOCAL (ThiV) and multiplanar (ThiM) methods as independent variables. The accuracies of these formulas were compared.
The mean percentage difference between measurements performed using the VOCAL technique and the multiplanar technique was -0.04 and the 95% limits of agreement were -8.17 and 8.09. The mean percentage difference and 95% limits of agreement between paired measurements in the assessment of intraobserver and interobserver variability were -1.10 (-7.67 to 5.47) and 0.61 (-7.68 to 8.91) for the VOCAL technique and 1.03 (-6.35 to 8.41) and -0.68 (-11.42 to 10.06) for the multiplanar method, respectively. The best-fit formulas for predicting birth weight (BW) were: BW = 1025.383 + 12.775x ThiV; and BW = 1033.286 + 12.733x ThiM. There was no significant difference between the accuracies of these formulas.
There is good agreement between the VOCAL and multiplanar techniques for assessment of total fetal thigh volume. Measurements performed using both methods are repeatable and reproducible. For prediction of birth weight, the formulas generated in this study can be used interchangeably.
评估多平面和虚拟器官计算机辅助分析(VOCAL)技术在测量胎儿大腿总容积方面的一致性,并评估使用这些方法进行测量的重复性和可再现性;为两种方法建立预测出生体重的模型,并比较其准确性。
这是一项在 30-42 孕周的 150 例单胎妊娠的横断面研究,在分娩后 48 小时内通过超声获得胎儿大腿容积,并使用多平面和 VOCAL 技术进行测量。采用 Bland-Altman 分析来确定两种方法之间的一致性,并在 40 例患者的亚组中评估观察者内和观察者间的变异性。使用通过 VOCAL(ThiV)和多平面(ThiM)方法获得的胎儿大腿总容积作为自变量来建立预测出生体重的模型。比较这些公式的准确性。
使用 VOCAL 技术测量的结果与使用多平面技术测量的结果之间的平均百分比差异为-0.04,95%一致性区间为-8.17 和 8.09。在评估观察者内和观察者间变异性时,配对测量的平均百分比差异和 95%一致性区间分别为-1.10(-7.67 至 5.47)和 0.61(-7.68 至 8.91),对于 VOCAL 技术;和 1.03(-6.35 至 8.41)和-0.68(-11.42 至 10.06),对于多平面方法。预测出生体重(BW)的最佳拟合公式为:BW=1025.383+12.775x ThiV;和 BW=1033.286+12.733x ThiM。这些公式的准确性没有显著差异。
在评估胎儿大腿总容积方面,VOCAL 和多平面技术之间具有良好的一致性。使用这两种方法进行的测量具有重复性和可再现性。对于预测出生体重,本研究中生成的公式可以互换使用。