MRI-Ultrasound Fusion Imaging for Diagnosis of Deep Infiltrating Endometriosis - A Critical Appraisal.

IF 1.3 Q3 RADIOLOGY, NUCLEAR MEDICINE & MEDICAL IMAGING Ultrasound International Open Pub Date : 2018-09-01 Epub Date: 2018-09-24 DOI:10.1055/a-0647-1575
Judith Berger, Onno Henneman, Johann Rhemrev, Maddy Smeets, Frank Willem Jansen
{"title":"MRI-Ultrasound Fusion Imaging for Diagnosis of Deep Infiltrating Endometriosis - A Critical Appraisal.","authors":"Judith Berger,&nbsp;Onno Henneman,&nbsp;Johann Rhemrev,&nbsp;Maddy Smeets,&nbsp;Frank Willem Jansen","doi":"10.1055/a-0647-1575","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Purpose: </strong>It was the aim of our study to evaluate this procedure using pelvic anatomical landmarks in order to assess the accuracy of fusion imaging and to critically evaluate the applicability in daily practice.</p><p><strong>Methods: </strong>In a prospective, single center study, 10 patients with clinical signs of deep infiltrating endometriosis (DIE) were selected. We measured the distance between the landmark organ and the target shown by the software system (measurement 1). Measurement 2 depicts the distance between the landmark and the nearest calibration point. The calibration inaccuracy was measured as a third type of measurement (measurement 3).</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>Measurement 1: the average distance between the organ landmark to the target was 13.6 mm (range: 0-96 mm). Measurement 2: in 31 of the 40 attempts (77.5 %), we could measure the distance from the landmark organ to the nearest calibration point. The average distance was 34.4 mm (range: 0-69 mm).Measurement 3: A perfect match was seen in 6 of 20 attempts (30.0 %). There was a deviation in 14 of the 20 attempts (70.0 %). The mean distance was 11.1 mm (range: 6-23 mm). Conclusion Although very promising, MRI-ultrasound fusion imaging (MUFI) currently cannot be readily implemented into daily practice as a routine evaluation of DIE.</p>","PeriodicalId":44852,"journal":{"name":"Ultrasound International Open","volume":"4 3","pages":"E85-E90"},"PeriodicalIF":1.3000,"publicationDate":"2018-09-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://sci-hub-pdf.com/10.1055/a-0647-1575","citationCount":"9","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Ultrasound International Open","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1055/a-0647-1575","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"2018/9/24 0:00:00","PubModel":"Epub","JCR":"Q3","JCRName":"RADIOLOGY, NUCLEAR MEDICINE & MEDICAL IMAGING","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 9

Abstract

Purpose: It was the aim of our study to evaluate this procedure using pelvic anatomical landmarks in order to assess the accuracy of fusion imaging and to critically evaluate the applicability in daily practice.

Methods: In a prospective, single center study, 10 patients with clinical signs of deep infiltrating endometriosis (DIE) were selected. We measured the distance between the landmark organ and the target shown by the software system (measurement 1). Measurement 2 depicts the distance between the landmark and the nearest calibration point. The calibration inaccuracy was measured as a third type of measurement (measurement 3).

Results: Measurement 1: the average distance between the organ landmark to the target was 13.6 mm (range: 0-96 mm). Measurement 2: in 31 of the 40 attempts (77.5 %), we could measure the distance from the landmark organ to the nearest calibration point. The average distance was 34.4 mm (range: 0-69 mm).Measurement 3: A perfect match was seen in 6 of 20 attempts (30.0 %). There was a deviation in 14 of the 20 attempts (70.0 %). The mean distance was 11.1 mm (range: 6-23 mm). Conclusion Although very promising, MRI-ultrasound fusion imaging (MUFI) currently cannot be readily implemented into daily practice as a routine evaluation of DIE.

Abstract Image

Abstract Image

Abstract Image

查看原文
分享 分享
微信好友 朋友圈 QQ好友 复制链接
本刊更多论文
mri超声融合成像诊断深浸润性子宫内膜异位症的关键评价。
目的:我们的研究目的是利用骨盆解剖标志来评估该手术,以评估融合成像的准确性,并批判性地评估其在日常实践中的适用性。方法:在一项前瞻性、单中心研究中,选择10例临床表现为深浸润性子宫内膜异位症(DIE)的患者。我们测量了软件系统显示的地标器官与目标之间的距离(测量1)。测量2描述了地标与最近的校准点之间的距离。校正误差作为第三种测量(测量3)测量。结果:测量1:器官标志到目标的平均距离为13.6 mm(范围:0-96 mm)。测量2:在40次尝试中有31次(77.5%),我们可以测量到从地标器官到最近的校准点的距离。平均距离为34.4 mm(范围:0-69 mm)。测量3:20次尝试中有6次完美匹配(30.0%)。20次尝试中有14次出现偏差(70.0%)。平均间距11.1 mm(范围6 ~ 23 mm)。结论mri -超声融合成像(MUFI)虽然很有前景,但目前还不能作为DIE的常规评估方法应用于日常实践。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 去求助
来源期刊
Ultrasound International Open
Ultrasound International Open RADIOLOGY, NUCLEAR MEDICINE & MEDICAL IMAGING-
CiteScore
3.00
自引率
0.00%
发文量
7
审稿时长
12 weeks
期刊最新文献
Congenital coarctation of the aorta: Role of peripheral vascular ultrasound in young hypertensive patients. Lung ultrasound score for the assessment of lung aeration in ARDS patients: comparison of two approaches. Pancreatic ultrasound: An update of measurements, reference values, and variations of the pancreas. Insights Into Modern Undergraduate Ultrasound Education: Prospective Comparison of Digital and Analog Teaching Resources in a Flipped Classroom Concept - The DIvAN Study. Ultrasound elastography: a brief clinical history of an evolving technique.
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
现在去查看 取消
×
提示
确定
0
微信
客服QQ
Book学术公众号 扫码关注我们
反馈
×
意见反馈
请填写您的意见或建议
请填写您的手机或邮箱
已复制链接
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
×
扫码分享
扫码分享
Book学术官方微信
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术
文献互助 智能选刊 最新文献 互助须知 联系我们:info@booksci.cn
Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。
Copyright © 2023 Book学术 All rights reserved.
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号 京ICP备2023020795号-1