The purpose of this study was to assess the accuracy of distance and volume measurements obtained by three‐dimensional ultrasonography. A tissue‐mimicking phantom was scanned using a prototype three‐dimensional sonographic imaging system to verify distance measurements. Measurements were taken from the reconstructed three‐dimensional sonographic data and compared to the real distances. Volume measurements were obtained by scanning 30 balloons of various shapes, sized 23 ml to 2400 ml. Each balloon was scanned twice in two orientations; three different masks were accomplished for each volume. Each volume measurement of 180 three‐dimensional sonographic measurements was compared to conventional two‐dimensional ultrasonographic volume estimates and to the actual, measured balloon size. Distance measurements had a mean error of 0.02 +/‐ 3.65% (range, ‐4.27 to 7.18%). Two‐dimensional sonographic volume estimates using traditional scanner based methods had a mean error of 13.7 +/‐ 10.1%. Three‐dimensional sonographic volume measurements had a mean error of 2.2 +/‐ 2.9% for regular and irregular objects over the entire range of volumes. The masking required 10 to 30 min. The field of view varied from 10 to 24 cm with a mean object depth of 9.8 cm. Three‐dimensional ultrasonographic methods can provide accurate volume measurements of regular and irregular objects and offer improved accuracy compared to traditional two‐dimensional methods.
The purpose of this paper is to investigate, identify and discuss artifacts and their sources arising in threedimensional ultrasound (3D US) in clinical practice in order to increase the awareness of clinicians and sonographers with respect to common 3D US artifacts and to use this increased awareness to avoid or reduce the occurrence of misdiagnosis in 3D US studies. Patient 3D US data were acquired using several different scanners and reviewed interactively on the scanner and graphics workstations. Artifacts were catalogued according to artifact origin. Two-dimensional ultrasound (2D US) artifacts were classified whether they were of a B-mode or color/power Doppler origin and their presentation in the original scan planes and the resulting volume re-sliced planes and rendered images was identified. Artifacts unique to 3D US were observed, noted and catalogued on the basis of whether they arose during acquisition, rendering or volume editing operations. Acoustic artifacts identified included drop-out, shadowing, etc. whose presentation depended on the relationship between slice and imaging plane orientation. Color/ power Doppler artifacts were related to gain, aliasing, and flash which could add apparent structure or confusion to the volume images. Rendered images also demonstrated artifacts due to shadowing and motion of adjacent structures, cardiac motion or pulsatility of the cardiac septum or vessel walls. Editing artifacts potentially removed important structures.
The purpose of this study was to assess the accuracy of in vivo measurement of organ volume using 3DUS and compare the results to 2D sonographic methods using the urinary bladder as the target organ and voided urine volume for validation. Fifty normal volunteers were studied. 2D volume measurements were based on length, width, and depth data and assumed a regular geometric model. 3D volume measurements were based on masked slices with the voxels integrated over the entire bladder. Voided urine volumes ranged from 35 ml to 701 ml. Residual urine volume was present in 48% of the subjects and ranged from 1% to 14% of the voided volume. 2D volume estimates for all 50 subjects had a mean absolute value of the error of 27.5% +/- 17.8%. 3D volume measurements had a mean absolute value of the error of 4.3% +/- 3.7% (transverse) and 5.6% +/- 3.8% (longitudinal). 3DUS provided more accurate volume measurements than 2DUS, particularly for irregularly shaped organs.
With the decision-tree approach, typical sonographic patterns can be described and used for accurate diagnosis of isolated renal cystic diseases and polymalformative syndromes. In some cases, however, the diagnosis is not achieved, and complementary examinations are needed.
scite is a Brooklyn-based organization that helps researchers better discover and understand research articles through Smart Citations–citations that display the context of the citation and describe whether the article provides supporting or contrasting evidence. scite is used by students and researchers from around the world and is funded in part by the National Science Foundation and the National Institute on Drug Abuse of the National Institutes of Health.