AIUM Practice Guideline for the Performance of Pelvic Ultrasound Examinations

Voorhis, Van; Bradley, J.A.

doi:10.7863/jum.2010.29.1.166

Cited by 26 publications

(4 citation statements)

References 16 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…A systematic approach was first taken to find the best model that predicted PCOS. Then, because FNPO, FNPS, and OV are markers most currently recommended for evaluation in clinical practice (28, 29), we analyzed if any additional features improved the diagnostic potential of these markers alone. To accomplish these goals, combinations of FNPO, FNPS, OV, OA, SA, S:A, SI and distribution pattern were entered in a stepwise manner to the logistic regression.…”

Section: Methodsmentioning

confidence: 99%

Follicle number, not assessments of the ovarian stroma, represents the best ultrasonographic marker of polycystic ovary syndrome

Christ

Willis

Brooks

et al. 2014

Fertility and Sterility

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Objective To compare the diagnostic potential of ultrasonographic markers of ovarian morphology, used alone or in combination, to predict PCOS. Design A diagnostic test study using cross-sectional data collected from 2006 to 2011. Setting Academic hospital and clinical research unit. Participants 82 women with PCOS and 60 healthy female volunteers. Interventions None. Main Outcome Measures Follicle number per ovary (FNPO), ovarian volume (OV), follicle number per single cross-section (FNPS), follicle distribution pattern, stromal area, ovarian area, stromal to ovarian area ratio (S:A) and stromal index (SI). Results FNPO best predicted PCOS (R2=67%) with 85% sensitivity and 98% specificity, followed by OV (R2=44%), and FNPS (R2=36%). Neither S:AnorSI had predictive power for PCOS. In combination, FNPO+S:A and FNPO+SI most significantly predicted PCOS (R2=74% vs.73%, respectively). The diagnostic potentials of OV and FNPS were substantially improved when used in combination (OV+FNPO,R2=55%). Conclusions As a single metric, FNPO best predicted PCOS. While the addition of S:Aor SI improved the predictive power of FNPO, gains were marginal suggesting limited use in clinical practice. When image quality precludes a reliable estimation of FNPO, measurements of OV+FNPS provide the next closest level of diagnostic potential.

show abstract

Section: Methodsmentioning

confidence: 99%

Follicle number, not assessments of the ovarian stroma, represents the best ultrasonographic marker of polycystic ovary syndrome

Christ

Willis

Brooks

et al. 2014

Fertility and Sterility

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…The American Institute of Ultrasound Medicine (AIUM) 2010 guidelines recommends a pelvic ultrasound for women with 18 distinct conditions or symptoms, but does not discuss asymptomatic screening 27. Studies seeking to determine the utility of ultrasound for endometrial and bladder cancer in asymptomatic patients have shown that its use as a screening tool is not yet validated 28–29.…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

USEFUL: Ultrasound Exam for Underlying Lesions Incorporated into Physical Exam

Steller¹,

Russell²,

Lotfipour³

et al. 2014

WestJEM

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Introduction: The Ultrasound Screening Exam for Underlying Lesions (USEFUL) was developed in an attempt to establish a role for bedside ultrasound in the primary and preventive care setting. It is the purpose of our pilot study to determine if students were first capable of performing all of the various scans required of our USEFUL while defining such an ultrasound-assisted physical exam that would supplement the standard hands-on physical exam in the same head-to-toe structure. We also aimed to assess the time needed for an adequate exam and analyze if times improved with repetition and previous ultrasound training.Methods: Medical students with ranging levels of ultrasound training received a 25-minute presentation on our USEFUL followed by a 30-minute hands-on session. Following the hands-on session, the students were asked to perform a timed USEFUL on 2–3 standardized subjects. All images were documented as normal or abnormal with the understanding that an official detailed exam would be performed if an abnormality were to be found. All images were read and deemed adequate by board eligible emergency medicine ultrasound fellows.Results: Twenty-six exams were performed by 9 students. The average time spent by all students per USEFUL was 11 minutes and 19 seconds. Students who had received the University of California, Irvine School of Medicine's integrated ultrasound curriculum performed the USEFUL significantly faster (p< 0.0025). The time it took to complete the USEFUL ranged from 6 minutes and 32 seconds to 17 minutes, and improvement was seen with each USEFUL performed. The average time to complete the USEFUL on the first standardized patient was 13 minutes and 20 seconds, while 11 minutes and 2 seconds, and 9 minutes and 20 seconds were spent performing the exam on the second and third patient, respectively.Conclusion: Students were able to effectively complete all scans required by the USEFUL in a timely manner. Students who have been a part of the integrated ultrasound in medicine curriculum performed the USEFUL significantly faster than students who had not. Students were able to significantly improve upon the time it took them to complete the USEFUL with successive attempts. Future endpoints are aimed at assessing the feasibility and outcomes of an ultrasound-assisted physical exam in a primary care setting and the exam's effect on doctor-patient satisfaction. [West J Emerg Med. 2014;15(3):260–266.]

show abstract

“…The number of incidentally discovered ovarian masses has significantly increased with technical improvements in and increased utilization of cross-sectional imaging [ 11 ] .…”

Section: Ovarian Incidentalomasmentioning

confidence: 99%

Pelvic incidentalomas

Gore

Newmark²,

Thakrar³

et al. 2010

Cancer Imaging

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Recent advances in multi-detector computed tomography, magnetic resonance imaging, and ultrasound have led to the detection of incidental ovarian, uterine, vascular and pelvic nodal abnormalities in both the oncology and non-oncology patient population that in the past remained undiscovered. These incidental pelvic lesions have created a management dilemma for both clinicians and radiologists. Depending on the clinical setting, these lesions may require no further evaluation, additional immediate or serial follow-up imaging, or surgical intervention. In this review, guidelines concerning the diagnosis and management of some of the more common pelvic incidentalomas are presented.

show abstract

AIUM Practice Guideline for the Performance of Pelvic Ultrasound Examinations

Cited by 26 publications

References 16 publications

Follicle number, not assessments of the ovarian stroma, represents the best ultrasonographic marker of polycystic ovary syndrome

Follicle number, not assessments of the ovarian stroma, represents the best ultrasonographic marker of polycystic ovary syndrome

USEFUL: Ultrasound Exam for Underlying Lesions Incorporated into Physical Exam

Pelvic incidentalomas

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About