ULTRASOUND Messages for May, 1999: R: ULTRASOUND digest 530

R: ULTRASOUND digest 530

From: Dr. Stefano Ciatti

studiociatti@iol.it

Mon May 3 12:00:52 1999

I think that the importance of ovarian volumes through 3D US is their improved reproducibility rather than comparison with "charts" many pts. with normal volumes ovaries have PCO other than that 3D US allows a more precise estimation of the stromal component and its vascularization . 3D US will rise the digniity of US to CT and MRI furnishing data which are less dependent from the hand of the artist sonologist or sonographer.

regards DR STEFANO CIATTI STUDIO ECOGRAFICO VIA S. GIORGIO 13 INT 8/9 59100 PRATO (PO) ITALY TEL +390574603435 FAX +390574607361 E-MAIL studiociatti@iol.it studiociatti@texnet.it these two e-mail addresses accept attachment up to 5Mb

-----Messaggio originale----- Da: ultrasound@obgyn.net <ultrasound@obgyn.net> A: Multiple recipients of list ULTRASOUND <ultrasound@talk.obgyn.net> Data: lunedė 3 maggio 1999 16.51 Oggetto: ULTRASOUND digest 530

> ULTRASOUND Digest 530
>
>Topics covered in this issue include:
>
> 1) Re: Ovarian volumes
> by evsono@pipeline.com (art fougner, md)
> 2) Re: Sonohysterogram?
> by Jann Dolk <dolk@umbc.edu>
> 3) Re: Sonohysterogram?
> by "Terry J. DuBose" <tjdubose@juno.com>
> 4) sonogram measurements do not match @ 36 weeks
> by "Diana Nowlin" <diana.nowlin@forbusiness.com>
> 5) RE: Ovarian volumes
> by "DuBose, Terry" <DuboseTerryJ@exchange.uams.edu>
> 6) RE: UAMS DMS Accredited!
> by "DuBose, Terry" <DuboseTerryJ@exchange.uams.edu>
> 7) RE: Ovarian volumes
> by "DuBose, Terry" <DuboseTerryJ@exchange.uams.edu>
>
>----------------------------------------------------------------------
>
>----------------------------------------------------------------------
>Date: Sun, 2 May 1999 11:46:41 -0500 (CDT)
>----------------------------------------------------------------------
>From: evsono@pipeline.com (art fougner, md)
>To: ULTRASOUND@OBGYN.net
>Subject: Re: Ovarian volumes
>Message-ID: <199905021646.LAA02434@talk.obgyn.net>
>
>Doubtless with the 3D machines, we'll see another round of nomograms in
>the journals.
>
>Art
>
>At Sat, 1 May 1999, Terry J. DuBose wrote:
>>
>>Actually, using (D1x(D2 squared))0.523 is not cheating, but is the
>>original formula for a regular prolate (rotating) ellipse volume. This
>>was modified for biometric geometry because very few organs are smooth,
>>regular ellipsoids. Most tissues have some variation in the 3 diameters.
>> Because they are all just close estimates of the volume, you can
>>probably use any formula you choose, so long as you are consistent in
>>your methods.
>>
>>The only caution I would have is that if you are going to use
>>measurements and volume estimates for comparison to published tables to
>>determine normality, then you should use the same methodology for
>>measurements and formulae as the original research that produced the
>>table(s). If not your results may not compare favorably to the table(s).
>>
>>Peace, Terry J. DuBose, M.S., RDMS
>>University of Arkansas for Medical Sciences
>>Littel Rock, AR, USA
>>
>>On Sat, 1 May 1999 00:01:02 -0500 "Durr-e- Sabih" <dsabih@hotmail.com>
>>writes:
>>>There is another formula for a "rotating ellipse" which I think works
>>>for
>>>ovarian volume too, instead of D1xD2XD3, try only D1 (long axis) and
>>>D2xD2
>>>(two short axes)...I guess this is cheating a little bit, but appears
>>>more
>>>convenient....any comments?
>>>
>>>Dr. Durr-e-Sabih
>>>Multan, Pakistan
>>>dsabih@hotmail.com
>>>
>
>--
>art fougner, md
>SonoScan/Genetic Sciences
>forest hills, ny
>evsono@pipeline.com
>
>------------------------------
>
>------------------------------
>Date: Sun, 02 May 1999 18:28:59 -0400
>------------------------------
>From: Jann Dolk <dolk@umbc.edu>
>To: KYCOL5@aol.com
>Subject: Re: Sonohysterogram?
>Message-ID: <372CD1AA.DA896BE@umbc.edu>
>MIME-Version: 1.0
>Content-Type: multipart/alternative;

boundary="------------D33D535EB0F7F6DB5E65A1B5" >
>--------------D33D535EB0F7F6DB5E65A1B5
>Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
>Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
>
>i do not have my journals here- there is info in rumack's latest edition of
>ultrasound- i am going to try to foward you to the list serve- can anyone
here >help this sonographer?- jann
>
>KYCOL5@aol.com wrote:
>
>> Hi
>> I am a Sonographer in need of some info regarding a sonohysterogram. I
have a >> patient scheduled for 5/6/99. The Radiologist and Gyne have requested my
>> presence for this procedure. I would like to update and refresh myself
before >> this patient arrives in the Ultrasound Dept. All the books I have access
to >> do not cover this procedure, I remember reading about this subject in an
>> Ultrasound journal. Any help regarding this procedure would be
appreciated. >>
>> Thank You
>> Pam Grabinski RDMS
>> Palos Community Hospital
>
>--
>Jann Dolk, MA, RT(R), RDMS
>Program Director
>UMBC Diagnostic Medical Sonography Program
>1000 Hilltop Circle
>Baltimore, MD 21250
>410-455-2758
>410-455-1322 FAX
>410-232-3712 PAGER
>dolk@umbc.edu
>
>--------------D33D535EB0F7F6DB5E65A1B5
>Content-Type: text/html; charset=us-ascii
>Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
>
><HTML>
>i do not have my journals here- there is info
>in rumack's latest edition of ultrasound- i am going to try to foward you
>to the list serve- can anyone here help this sonographer?- jann
>
>KYCOL5@aol.com wrote:
><BLOCKQUOTE TYPE=CITE>Hi
> I am a Sonographer in need of some info regarding a sonohysterogram.
>I have a
> patient scheduled for 5/6/99. The Radiologist and Gyne have requested
>my
> presence for this procedure. I would like to update and refresh myself
>before
> this patient arrives in the Ultrasound Dept. All the books I have
access >to
> do not cover this procedure, I remember reading about this subject
>in an
> Ultrasound journal. Any help regarding this procedure would  be
>appreciated.
>
>Thank You
> Pam Grabinski RDMS
> Palos Community Hospital</BLOCKQUOTE>
> 
>
>--
> Jann Dolk, MA, RT(R), RDMS
> Program Director
> UMBC Diagnostic Medical Sonography Program
> 1000 Hilltop Circle
> Baltimore, MD 21250
> 410-455-2758
> 410-455-1322 FAX
> 410-232-3712 PAGER
> dolk@umbc.edu
>  </HTML>
>
>--------------D33D535EB0F7F6DB5E65A1B5--
>
>------------------------------
>
>------------------------------
>Date: Sun, 2 May 1999 17:42:23 -0500
>------------------------------
>From: "Terry J. DuBose" <tjdubose@juno.com>
>To: ultrasound@obgyn.net, spnglr@aol.com
>Cc: ultrasound@talk.obgyn.net
>Subject: Re: Sonohysterogram?
>Message-ID: <19990502.174337.4942.5.tjdubose@juno.com>
>
>Pam, go on the http://wwweb to the OBGYN.net Ultrasound section (http://www.obgyn.net,
>professionals, ultrasound), scroll down to the bottom of the pages, and
>you will find a "Search" button. Do a search on Sonohysterography, and
>also on "Spangler". Nancy Spangler is something of an expert on this
>exam, and has lectured on it often. There have been several exchanges on
>the Ultrasound Forum that may help you. Good luck.
>
>Peace, Terry J. DuBose, M.S., RDMS, FAIUM
>University of Arkansas for Medcial Sciences
>Little Rock, AR, USA
>
>--------
>On Sun, 2 May 1999 17:28:47 -0500 Jann Dolk <dolk@umbc.edu> writes:
>>
>>--------------D33D535EB0F7F6DB5E65A1B5
>>Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
>>Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
>>
>>i do not have my journals here- there is info in rumack's latest
>>edition of
>>ultrasound- i am going to try to foward you to the list serve- can
>>anyone here
>>help this sonographer?- jann
>>
>>KYCOL5@aol.com wrote:
>>
>>> Hi
>>> I am a Sonographer in need of some info regarding a sonohysterogram.
>>I have a
>>> patient scheduled for 5/6/99. The Radiologist and Gyne have
>>requested my
>>> presence for this procedure. I would like to update and refresh
>>myself before
>>> this patient arrives in the Ultrasound Dept. All the books I have
>>access to
>>> do not cover this procedure, I remember reading about this subject
>>in an
>>> Ultrasound journal. Any help regarding this procedure would be
>>appreciated.
>>>
>>> Thank You
>>> Pam Grabinski RDMS
>>> Palos Community Hospital
>>
>>--
>>Jann Dolk, MA, RT(R), RDMS
>>Program Director
>>UMBC Diagnostic Medical Sonography Program
>>1000 Hilltop Circle
>>Baltimore, MD 21250
>>410-455-2758
>>410-455-1322 FAX
>>410-232-3712 PAGER
>>dolk@umbc.edu
>>
>>--------------D33D535EB0F7F6DB5E65A1B5
>>Content-Type: text/html; charset=us-ascii
>>Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
>>
>><HTML>
>>i do not have my journals here- there is info
>>in rumack's latest edition of ultrasound- i am going to try to foward
>>you
>>to the list serve- can anyone here help this sonographer?- jann
>>
>>KYCOL5@aol.com wrote:
>><BLOCKQUOTE TYPE=CITE>Hi
>> I am a Sonographer in need of some info regarding a
>>sonohysterogram.
>>I have a
>> patient scheduled for 5/6/99. The Radiologist and Gyne have
>>requested
>>my
>> presence for this procedure. I would like to update and refresh
>>myself
>>before
>> this patient arrives in the Ultrasound Dept. All the books I have
>>access
>>to
>> do not cover this procedure, I remember reading about this subject
>>in an
>> Ultrasound journal. Any help regarding this procedure would 
>>be
>>appreciated.
>>
>>Thank You
>> Pam Grabinski RDMS
>> Palos Community Hospital</BLOCKQUOTE>
>> 
>>
>>--
>> Jann Dolk, MA, RT(R), RDMS
>> Program Director
>> UMBC Diagnostic Medical Sonography Program
>> 1000 Hilltop Circle
>> Baltimore, MD 21250
>> 410-455-2758
>> 410-455-1322 FAX
>> 410-232-3712 PAGER
>> dolk@umbc.edu
>>  </HTML>
>>
>>--------------D33D535EB0F7F6DB5E65A1B5--
>>
>

>or call Juno at (800) 654-JUNO [654-5866]
>
>------------------------------
>
>------------------------------
>Date: Mon, 3 May 1999 07:47:51 -0500
>------------------------------
>From: "Diana Nowlin" <diana.nowlin@forbusiness.com>
>To: <Ultrasound@OBGYN.net>
>Subject: sonogram measurements do not match @ 36 weeks
>Message-ID: <000001be9563$28610360$54650304@diana.gte.net>
>MIME-Version: 1.0
>Content-Type: text/plain;
> charset="iso-8859-1"
>Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
>
>Hello,
>My name is Diana Nowlin. I am 36 weeks pregnant and I am hoping you can
give >me some insight on my last sonogram measurements. I am scheduled for
another >type of sonogram, it is supposed to be more accurate showing blood flow, in
>color, etc... on Wed. after being told last Friday that my sons head was
>measuring 36 weeks, his torso 36 weeks but his legs were only measuring 32
>or 33 weeks. I'm needless to say going crazy right now thinking of the
worse >case possible. Can you tell me if you've ever seen anything like this or if
>his legs could still catch up with the rest of his body? Is a 3 or 4 week
>difference like this huge or not as bad as what I fear? I realize this is
>not a true diagnosis on your part and there is not much information to go
on >either. I only want to know if you have ever seen it before and if you can
>tell me anything that might ease my mind.
>
>Thank you,
>Diana
>
>------------------------------
>
>------------------------------
>Date: Mon, 3 May 1999 08:33:44 -0500
>------------------------------
>From: "DuBose, Terry" <DuboseTerryJ@exchange.uams.edu>
>To: "'ultrasound@obgyn.net'" <ultrasound@obgyn.net>,
> Multiple recipients of list ULTRASOUND <ultrasound@talk.obgyn.net>
>Subject: RE: Ovarian volumes
>Message-ID: <FA16403E0560D211B453006097CEBBBE014ADBF3@EXCHANGE2>
>MIME-Version: 1.0
>Content-Type: text/plain
>
>If you multiply D1xD2xD2 the volume is for the volume of irregular
polyhedra >(like a cube with a long axis). This will over estimate the volume of an
>egg shape by a factor of almost 2. I know of no formulae for ovaries,
>kidneys, uteri, or fetal crania that is not a rounded variation of:
>
>V = D1xD2xD3x0.523
>
>However, the urinary bladder, being more of a pyramidal shape does not
>usually use this formula.
>
>Peace, Terry J. DuBose, M.S., RDMS, FAIUM
>University of Arkansas for Medical Sciences
>Little Rock, AR, USA
>
> -----Original Message-----
> From: Durr-e- Sabih [SMTP:dsabih@hotmail.com]
> Sent: Saturday, May 01, 1999 12:01 AM
> To: Multiple recipients of list ULTRASOUND
> Subject: Ovarian volumes
>
> There is another formula for a "rotating ellipse" which I think
>works for
> ovarian volume too, instead of D1xD2XD3, try only D1 (long axis) and
>D2xD2
> (two short axes)...I guess this is cheating a little bit, but
>appears more
> convenient....any comments?
>
> Dr. Durr-e-Sabih
> Multan, Pakistan
> dsabih@hotmail.com
>
>------------------------------
>
>------------------------------
>Date: Mon, 3 May 1999 08:35:28 -0500
>------------------------------
>From: "DuBose, Terry" <DuboseTerryJ@exchange.uams.edu>
>To: "'ultrasound@obgyn.net'" <ultrasound@obgyn.net>
>Subject: RE: UAMS DMS Accredited!
>Message-ID: <FA16403E0560D211B453006097CEBBBE014ADBF5@EXCHANGE2>
>MIME-Version: 1.0
>Content-Type: text/plain
>
>Thanks, very much.
>
>Peace, Terry J. DuBose, M.S., RDMS, FAIUM
>University of Arkansas for Medical Sciences
>Little Rock, AR, USA
>
> -----Original Message-----
> From: Joe Cutchin [SMTP:forcep@shore.intercom.net]
> Sent: Saturday, May 01, 1999 10:02 AM
> To: Multiple recipients of list ULTRASOUND
> Subject: Re: UAMS DMS Accredited!
>
> Great work ,Terry and congrats.
>
> --
> Joseph H. Cutchin MD FACOG 4105463125
> 314 West Carroll Street 4105463128 Fax
> Salisbury,Maryland 21801
>
> http://www.penobgyn.com
>
>------------------------------
>
>------------------------------
>Date: Mon, 3 May 1999 08:39:11 -0500
>------------------------------
>From: "DuBose, Terry" <DuboseTerryJ@exchange.uams.edu>
>To: "'ultrasound@obgyn.net'" <ultrasound@obgyn.net>,
> Multiple recipients of list ULTRASOUND <ultrasound@talk.obgyn.net>
>Subject: RE: Ovarian volumes
>Message-ID: <FA16403E0560D211B453006097CEBBBE014ADBF7@EXCHANGE2>
>MIME-Version: 1.0
>Content-Type: text/plain
>
>I think you are correct to a large extent. I suppose we do volumes
because >they are considered more accurate... for the same reason that we use the
>transverse head circumference now rather than just the BPD, and I use the
3D >BPD correction... for accuracy. But sometimes I am sure it is overkill...
>However, once a protocol is established at an institution, then the
tendency >is to keep using it so that the later measurements can be compared to what
>is already known.
>
>Peace, Terry J. DuBose, M.S., RDMS, FAIUM
>University of Arkansas for Medical Sciences
>Little Rock, AR, USA
>
> -----Original Message-----
> From: luis daniel flores [SMTP:luda@arnet.com.ar]
> Sent: Saturday, May 01, 1999 8:12 PM
> To: Multiple recipients of list ULTRASOUND
> Subject: RE: Ovarian volumes
>
> Why is it important the ovairna volume besides research? it is easy
>to
> consider the largest diameter, should not exceed 3 cm.
> Luis Flores MRCOG
>
>------------------------------
>
>------------------------------
>End of ULTRASOUND Digest 530
>------------------------------
>****************************

Women's Insurance Checklist from Auto Insurance Quote

use when must restrict search to only the ultrasound forum...
Enter search keywords:
	Returns per screen: Require all keywords: