-VISIT OUR OTHER FORUMS- OB-GYN-L Ultrasound Ultrasound History Fibroid Forum Physicians-in-Training Tech Talk OBSTET-L (portuguese) OBGIN-L (spanish) Nursing

Re: GYN measurements From: Terry J. DuBose (tjdubose@juno.com) Sat Dec 6 17:14:28 1997 Messages sorted by: [ date ][ thread ][ subject ][ author ] Next message: JT & JL Tomko: "Re: Synechia/Amniotic Bands" Previous message: Terry J. DuBose: "Re: Synechia/Amniotic Bands?" Maybe in reply to: Spnglr: "GYN measurements" Nancy, may I point out to the list that the numbers you give below are for double endometrial layers (both sides of the uterine cavum). That is correct, isn't it? From the magnitude, I believe they are, but there are students that need to be informed. Since there are published reports for both single layer and double layer measurements, I like to know specifically which it is. Probably goes back to my training in radiology. ;-) Also, as pointed out earlier by someone on the list, observation of the texture and contour is important. Nancy, how about collecting four (weekly) very representative endometrial measurement images and writing a brief discussion of your measurements. Perhaps two sets? Pre and post menopausal. Now how do we get the images digitized? Nancy, if I remember correctly you only got wired about September this year, so I suspect you don't have a flatbed scanner... yet. ;-) You could snail mail them to me,... you could enclose the text with them or email it to me. Let me know if you are willing to do this. Please don't feel obligated. And last thanks for the input. Peace, Terry J. DuBose On Sat, 6 Dec 1997 13:51:24 -0600 Spnglr <Spnglr@aol.com> writes: >16mm is widely accepted as upper limits of nml in premenopausal women, >8mm in postmenopausal w/o HRT. >Women on a regimen of estogen/progesterone tend to have endometrial >appearance similar to normally cycling women. For women on >unopposed estrogen, a cutoff of 10mm is probably not unreasonable >as this is the group at higher risk. An endometrial thickness of 5mm or >less has been shown to correspond to >insufficient tissue to analyze by endo bx. > >A big question is: What does one do with the "numbers"? >Automatic endometrial bx? > >Personal experience has shown me that radiologists tend to be much >more "number" orieneted/inclined than the gyns or > family medicine people and that, >often times, the referring will feel pressured into the pursuit of >more invasive procedures based upon a radiology report. > >IMHO: There is no comparison between reference standards for labortory >procedures and establishing universal standards for sonographic >measurements. >Far more variables in sonography. Apples and oranges, I think. > >Nancy >spnglr@aol.com > Next message: JT & JL Tomko: "Re: Synechia/Amniotic Bands" Previous message: Terry J. DuBose: "Re: Synechia/Amniotic Bands?" Maybe in reply to: Spnglr: "GYN measurements"

recommended search...
OBGYN.net forums endometriosis zone Web

Return to

Mail a New Message to the Forum: ultrasound@obgyn.net Forum Administrator: terry.dubose@obgyn.net Report Technical Problems: webmaster@obgyn.net Last Updated: Mon Nov 2 05:38:25 2009

The American Medical Association is no longer designating CME hours for AMA Category II CME credit. However, physicians themselves may self designate learning activities as Category II CME credit hours if they feel it is of sufficient educational merit and meets the formal definitions of continuing medical education. OBGYN.net believes these interaction in this forum meets these criteria. For further information see the AMA web site.