Intra- and Interobserver Variability in Ultrasound Measurement of Testicular Volumes in Pubertal Boys

被引:0
|
作者
Schaefer, Frank-Mattias [1 ,2 ]
Buergener, Daniel [1 ]
Stehr, Maximilian [1 ]
Rompel, Oliver [3 ]
机构
[1] Cnopfsche Kinderklin, Dept Pediat Surg & Pediat Urol, D-90419 Nurnberg, Germany
[2] Friedrich Alexander Univ FAU Erlangen Nurnberg, Univ Hosp Erlangen, Clin Urol & Pediat Urol, D-91054 Erlangen, Germany
[3] Friedrich Alexander Univ Erlangen Nurnberg FAU, Univ Hosp Erlangen, Inst Radiol, D-91054 Erlangen, Germany
来源
CHILDREN-BASEL | 2024年 / 11卷 / 06期
关键词
testicular size; testicular ultrasound; varicocele; intraobserver variability; interobserver variability; ORCHIDOMETER;
D O I
10.3390/children11060741
中图分类号
R72 [儿科学];
学科分类号
100202 ;
摘要
Accurate measurement of testicular volume (TV) in boys is an important tool in clinical practice, e.g., in varicocele treatment. This study aims to assess the degree of intra- and interobserver variability of testicular volume measurements. In a prospective study, boys between 11 and 17 years of age without testicular pathology were enrolled. Testicular ultrasound was performed by three investigators (A: pediatric radiologist; B: pediatric surgery/urology resident; C: pediatric urologist). Intraobserver variability was calculated in investigators B and C and interobserver variability between all three investigators. A total of 30 boys were enrolled. Mean intraobserver variability in both observers was +0.3% with a range of -39.6 to 51.5%. The proportion of measurements with a difference >20% was 18.6%. The mean interobserver variability was -1.0% (range: -74.1% to 62.8%). The overall proportion of measurements with a difference >20% was 35%. A lower testicular size of < 4 mL showed a significantly higher rate of >20% difference in both the intraobserver group (31.1% vs. 14.4%; p = 0.035) and the interobserver group (63.2% vs. 26.2%; p = 0.000031). Furthermore, the rate of >20% difference was significantly lower in obese compared to non-obese patients in both the intraobserver (2.8% vs. 22.4%; p = 0.0084) and the interobserver group (24% vs. 40.8%, p = 0.0427). Both intraobserver and interobserver variability in ultrasound-based TV measurements in pubertal boys contain a relevant degree of uncertainty that renders them unsuitable for individualized follow-up care. At the cohort level, however, mean differences in ultrasound-based TV measurements are low enough to make ultrasound comparisons reasonable.
引用
收藏
页数:9
相关论文
共 50 条
  • [41] Intra- and interobserver variability in the diagnosis of GERD by real-time MRI
    Hosseini, Ali Seif Amir
    Beham, Alexander
    Uhlig, Johannes
    Streit, Ulrike
    Uhlig, Annemarie
    Ellenrieder, Volker
    Joseph, Arun A.
    Voit, Dirk
    Frahm, Jens
    Uecker, Martin
    Lotz, Joachim
    Biggemann, Lorenz
    [J]. EUROPEAN JOURNAL OF RADIOLOGY, 2018, 104 : 14 - 19
  • [42] Intra- and interobserver variability of Kleerekoper’s method in vertebral fracture assessment
    Nese Olmez
    Taciser Kaya
    Rezzan Gunaydin
    Berna Dirim Vidinli
    Nezahat Erdogan
    Asuman Memis
    [J]. Clinical Rheumatology, 2005, 24 : 215 - 218
  • [43] Intra- and interobserver variability of Kleerekoper's method in vertebral fracture assessment
    Olmez, N
    Kaya, T
    Gunaydin, R
    Vidinli, BD
    Erdogan, N
    Memis, A
    [J]. CLINICAL RHEUMATOLOGY, 2005, 24 (03) : 215 - 218
  • [44] Intra- and interobserver reproducibility of assessment of Doppler ultrasound findings in adnexal masses
    Zannoni, L.
    Savelli, L.
    Jokubkiene, L.
    Di Legge, A.
    Condous, G.
    Testa, A. C.
    Sladkevicius, P.
    Valentin, L.
    [J]. ULTRASOUND IN OBSTETRICS & GYNECOLOGY, 2013, 42 (01) : 93 - 101
  • [45] Detection of varicose vein recurrence by duplex ultrasound: intra- and interobserver reproducibility
    Gauw, S. A.
    Pronk, P.
    Mooij, M. C.
    Gaastra, M. T. W.
    Lawson, J. A.
    van Vlijmen-van Keulen, C. J.
    [J]. PHLEBOLOGY, 2013, 28 (02) : 109 - 111
  • [46] The use of ultrasound to diagnose hepatic steatosis in type 2 diabetes: Intra- and interobserver variability and comparison with magnetic resonance spectroscopy
    Williamson, R. M.
    Perry, E.
    Glancy, S.
    Marshall, I.
    Gray, C.
    Nee, L. D.
    Hayes, P. C.
    Forbes, S.
    Frier, B. M.
    Johnston, G. I.
    Lee, A. J.
    Reynolds, R. M.
    Price, J. F.
    Strachan, M. W. J.
    [J]. CLINICAL RADIOLOGY, 2011, 66 (05) : 434 - 439
  • [47] Laryngeal tumor volume measurements determined with CT: A study on intra- and interobserver variability
    Hermans, R
    Feron, M
    Bellon, E
    Dupont, P
    Van den Bogaert, W
    Baert, AL
    [J]. INTERNATIONAL JOURNAL OF RADIATION ONCOLOGY BIOLOGY PHYSICS, 1998, 40 (03): : 553 - 557
  • [48] Intra- and Interobserver Variability in Magnetic Resonance Imaging Measurements in Rectal Cancer Patients
    Grimm, Peter
    Loft, Martina Kastrup
    Dam, Claus
    Pedersen, Malene Roland Vils
    Timm, Signe
    Rafaelsen, Soren Rafael
    [J]. CANCERS, 2021, 13 (20)
  • [49] Intra- and interobserver variability of language mapping by navigated transcranial magnetic brain stimulation
    Sollmann, Nico
    Hauck, Theresa
    Hapfelmeier, Alexander
    Meyer, Bernhard
    Ringel, Florian
    Krieg, Sandro M.
    [J]. BMC NEUROSCIENCE, 2013, 14
  • [50] Reliability and reproducibility of SmartLens®, a contact lens tonometer:: Intra- and interobserver variability.
    Vogel, A
    Beck, S
    Schwenn, O
    Grus, F
    Krummenauer, F
    Pfeiffer, N
    [J]. INVESTIGATIVE OPHTHALMOLOGY & VISUAL SCIENCE, 2001, 42 (04) : S821 - S821