Radiology
HOME HELP FEEDBACK SUBSCRIPTIONS ARCHIVE SEARCH TABLE OF CONTENTS
QUICK SEARCH:   [advanced]


     

This Article
Right arrow Figures Only
Right arrow Full Text
Right arrow Full Text (PDF)
Right arrow Submit a response
Right arrow Alert me when this article is cited
Right arrow Alert me when eLetters are posted
Right arrow Alert me if a correction is posted
Right arrow Citation Map
Services
Right arrow Email this article to a friend
Right arrow Similar articles in this journal
Right arrow Similar articles in PubMed
Right arrow Alert me to new issues of the journal
Right arrow Download to citation manager
Right arrow reprints & permissions
Citing Articles
Right arrow Citing Articles via Google Scholar
Google Scholar
Right arrow Articles by Bredella, M. A.
Right arrow Articles by Genant, H. K.
Right arrow Search for Related Content
PubMed
Right arrow PubMed Citation
Right arrow Articles by Bredella, M. A.
Right arrow Articles by Genant, H. K.
(Radiology. 2000;217:516-520.)
© RSNA, 2000

Genitourinary Imaging

Measurement of Endometrial Thickness at US in Multicenter Drug Trials: Value of Central Quality Assurance Reading1

Miriam A. Bredella, MD, Vickie A. Feldstein, MD, Roy A. Filly, MD, Ruth B. Goldstein, MD, Peter W. Callen, MD and Harry K. Genant, MD

1 From the Department of Radiology, University of California, San Francisco, 505 Parnassus Ave, Suite M-392, San Francisco, CA 94143-0628. From the 1999 RSNA scientific assembly. Received November 15, 1999; revision requested January 7, 2000; revision received March 20; accepted April 4. Address correspondence to M.A.B. (e-mail: mbredella@earthlink.net).

PURPOSE: To assess the value of central quality assurance (QA) reading of transvaginal ultrasonographic (US) images obtained to measure endometrial thickness and to assess image quality.

MATERIALS AND METHODS: Results of 2,000 US examinations performed in 1,000 subjects during one of two multicenter drug trials were evaluated. Endometrial thickness was measured at the study site; images were then sent to the QA center, where an experienced sonologist evaluated endometrial thickness and image quality.

RESULTS: In 360 (18%) of the 2,000 examinations, image quality was insufficient for central QA reading. Repeat examinations were requested, and suggestions for improvement in technique were provided. In 349 (97%) of the 360 examinations, repeat US images were of acceptable quality. In 99 (5%) of the 1,989 examinations in which endometrial thickness was measured, central measurement of thickness differed by more than 2 mm from that of the site. In a group (n = 300) that was followed up for 1 year, requests for repeat US examinations decreased from 24% at baseline to 11% at 1 year.

CONCLUSION: Central QA reading provides a consistent evaluation of endometrial thickness on US images obtained in multicenter drug trials and helps to ensure the acquisition of high-quality transvaginal US images. It further leads to demonstrable improvement in site performance.

Index terms: Ultrasound (US), quality assurance • Ultrasound (US), transvaginal, 854.1298 • Uterus, endometrium, 854.91