Objective To evaluate the reliability of two-and three-dimensional ultrasonographic measurement of the thickness of the lower uterine segment (LUS)

Objective To evaluate the intra-and interobserver reliability of assessment of three-dimensional power Intra-and interobserver reliability was assessed by intraclass correlation coefficients (ICC).Results Ninety-five pregnancies were included in the analysis. All three placental 3D-PD indices showed only weak to moderate reliability (ICC < 0.66 and ICC < 0.48, respectively

No abstract

Objectives To examine and compare the reproducibility of measurement of first-and second-trimester uterine artery pulsatility index (UtA-PI) using transabdominal (TAS) and transvaginal (TVS) ultrasound. Methods

No abstract

Objective To determine the validity and the intra-and interobserver reliability of volume measurements of an endometrium-like model using a three-dimensional (3D) ultrasound rotational technique. Methods

Objective To evaluate and compare the intraobserver and interobserver reliability and agreement for the biparietal diameter (BPD), abdominal circumference (AC), femur length (FL) and estimated fetal weight (EFW) obtained by two-dimensional ultrasound (2D-US) and threedimensional ultrasound (3D-US). Methods

Objective. Endothelial impairment evaluation by sonographic measurement of flow‐mediated dilatation (FMD) has become broadly used. However, this method has 2 main caveats: the dilatation depends on the baseline arterial diameter, and a high precision level is required. Vasodilatation leads to an amplified fall in impedance. We hypothesized that assessment of the pulsatility index change (PI‐C) 1 minute after 5‐minute forearm compression might evaluate that fall in impedance. The aim of this study was to compare the PI‐C with FMD. Methods. Flow‐mediated dilatation and the PI‐C were assessed in 51 healthy women aged between 35.1 and 67.1 years. We correlated both FMD and the PI‐C with age, body mass index, waist circumference, cholesterol level, high‐density lipoprotein level, glucose level, systolic and diastolic blood pressure, pulse pressure, brachial artery diameter, simplified Framingham score, intima‐media thickness, and carotid stiffness index. Intraclass correlation coefficients between 2 FMD and PI‐C measurements were also examined. Results. Only FMD correlated with baseline brachial diameter (r = −0.53). The PI‐C had a high correlation with age, body mass index, waist circumference, cholesterol level, systolic blood pressure, pulse pressure, simplified Framingham score, and intima‐media thickness. The correlation between FMD and the PI‐C was high (r = −0.66). The PI‐C had a higher intraclass correlation coefficient (0.991) than FMD (0.836) but not brachial artery diameter (0.989). Conclusions. The PI‐C had a large correlation with various markers of cardiovascular risk. Additionally, PI‐C measurement does not require offline analysis, extra software, or electrocardiography. We think that the PI‐C could be considered a marker of endothelial function. However, more studies are required before further conclusions.