Testicular volume: Comparison of orchidometer and US measurements in dogs

H. J. Paltiel; D. A. Diamond; J. Di Canzio; D. Zurakowski; J. G. Borer; A. Atala

doi:10.1148/radiol.2221001385

Testicular volume: Comparison of orchidometer and US measurements in dogs

H. J. Paltiel, D. A. Diamond, J. Di Canzio, D. Zurakowski, J. G. Borer, A. Atala

Surgery

Research output: Contribution to journal › Article › peer-review

130 Scopus citations

Abstract

PURPOSE: To compare the accuracy and precision of orchidometer and ultrasonographic (US) measurements of testicular volume in a canine model. MATERIALS AND METHODS: Volume measurements of 18 canine testes were obtained by using Prader and Rochester orchidometers. Testes were scanned with two linear-array US transducers with imaging frequencies of 6-13 MHz and 5-10 MHz. For each transducer, testicular volumes were calculated by using three formulas: length (L) × width (W) × height (H) × 0.52, L × W² × 0.52, and L × W × H × 0.71. Testes were weighed following bilateral orchiectomies. True testicular volume was determined by using the formula volume = weight/density. Paired t tests were used to assess whether mean measurement biases differed significantly from zero. The relationship between true and measured volume was evaluated with a linear regression model. RESULTS: US volume measurements demonstrated lower variability and better linear fit compared with orchidometry (R² = 0.75-0.90 vs R² = 0.14-0.38). The formula L × W × H × 0.71 had the smallest mean bias relative to true volume with use of either transducer over the entire volume range. CONCLUSION: US methods of testicular volume measurement are more accurate and precise than orchidometry. The formula L × W × H × 0.71 provides a superior estimate of testicular volume and should be used in clinical practice.

Original language	English (US)
Pages (from-to)	114-119
Number of pages	6
Journal	Radiology
Volume	222
Issue number	1
DOIs	https://doi.org/10.1148/radiol.2221001385
State	Published - Jan 1 2002

Keywords

Animals
Experimental study
Testis, US
Ultrasound (US), experimental studies

ASJC Scopus subject areas

Radiological and Ultrasound Technology

Access to Document

10.1148/radiol.2221001385

Fingerprint Dive into the research topics of 'Testicular volume: Comparison of orchidometer and US measurements in dogs'. Together they form a unique fingerprint.

Cite this

@article{9933955c24824226ac5b631d48e7a7cf,

title = "Testicular volume: Comparison of orchidometer and US measurements in dogs",

abstract = "PURPOSE: To compare the accuracy and precision of orchidometer and ultrasonographic (US) measurements of testicular volume in a canine model. MATERIALS AND METHODS: Volume measurements of 18 canine testes were obtained by using Prader and Rochester orchidometers. Testes were scanned with two linear-array US transducers with imaging frequencies of 6-13 MHz and 5-10 MHz. For each transducer, testicular volumes were calculated by using three formulas: length (L) × width (W) × height (H) × 0.52, L × W2 × 0.52, and L × W × H × 0.71. Testes were weighed following bilateral orchiectomies. True testicular volume was determined by using the formula volume = weight/density. Paired t tests were used to assess whether mean measurement biases differed significantly from zero. The relationship between true and measured volume was evaluated with a linear regression model. RESULTS: US volume measurements demonstrated lower variability and better linear fit compared with orchidometry (R2 = 0.75-0.90 vs R2 = 0.14-0.38). The formula L × W × H × 0.71 had the smallest mean bias relative to true volume with use of either transducer over the entire volume range. CONCLUSION: US methods of testicular volume measurement are more accurate and precise than orchidometry. The formula L × W × H × 0.71 provides a superior estimate of testicular volume and should be used in clinical practice.",

keywords = "Animals, Experimental study, Testis, US, Ultrasound (US), experimental studies",

author = "Paltiel, {H. J.} and Diamond, {D. A.} and {Di Canzio}, J. and D. Zurakowski and Borer, {J. G.} and A. Atala",

year = "2002",

month = jan,

day = "1",

doi = "10.1148/radiol.2221001385",

language = "English (US)",

volume = "222",

pages = "114--119",

journal = "Radiology",

issn = "0033-8419",

publisher = "Radiological Society of North America Inc.",

number = "1",

}

TY - JOUR

T1 - Testicular volume

T2 - Comparison of orchidometer and US measurements in dogs

AU - Paltiel, H. J.

AU - Diamond, D. A.

AU - Di Canzio, J.

AU - Zurakowski, D.

AU - Borer, J. G.

AU - Atala, A.

PY - 2002/1/1

Y1 - 2002/1/1

N2 - PURPOSE: To compare the accuracy and precision of orchidometer and ultrasonographic (US) measurements of testicular volume in a canine model. MATERIALS AND METHODS: Volume measurements of 18 canine testes were obtained by using Prader and Rochester orchidometers. Testes were scanned with two linear-array US transducers with imaging frequencies of 6-13 MHz and 5-10 MHz. For each transducer, testicular volumes were calculated by using three formulas: length (L) × width (W) × height (H) × 0.52, L × W2 × 0.52, and L × W × H × 0.71. Testes were weighed following bilateral orchiectomies. True testicular volume was determined by using the formula volume = weight/density. Paired t tests were used to assess whether mean measurement biases differed significantly from zero. The relationship between true and measured volume was evaluated with a linear regression model. RESULTS: US volume measurements demonstrated lower variability and better linear fit compared with orchidometry (R2 = 0.75-0.90 vs R2 = 0.14-0.38). The formula L × W × H × 0.71 had the smallest mean bias relative to true volume with use of either transducer over the entire volume range. CONCLUSION: US methods of testicular volume measurement are more accurate and precise than orchidometry. The formula L × W × H × 0.71 provides a superior estimate of testicular volume and should be used in clinical practice.

AB - PURPOSE: To compare the accuracy and precision of orchidometer and ultrasonographic (US) measurements of testicular volume in a canine model. MATERIALS AND METHODS: Volume measurements of 18 canine testes were obtained by using Prader and Rochester orchidometers. Testes were scanned with two linear-array US transducers with imaging frequencies of 6-13 MHz and 5-10 MHz. For each transducer, testicular volumes were calculated by using three formulas: length (L) × width (W) × height (H) × 0.52, L × W2 × 0.52, and L × W × H × 0.71. Testes were weighed following bilateral orchiectomies. True testicular volume was determined by using the formula volume = weight/density. Paired t tests were used to assess whether mean measurement biases differed significantly from zero. The relationship between true and measured volume was evaluated with a linear regression model. RESULTS: US volume measurements demonstrated lower variability and better linear fit compared with orchidometry (R2 = 0.75-0.90 vs R2 = 0.14-0.38). The formula L × W × H × 0.71 had the smallest mean bias relative to true volume with use of either transducer over the entire volume range. CONCLUSION: US methods of testicular volume measurement are more accurate and precise than orchidometry. The formula L × W × H × 0.71 provides a superior estimate of testicular volume and should be used in clinical practice.

KW - Animals

KW - Experimental study

KW - Testis, US

KW - Ultrasound (US), experimental studies

UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/record.url?scp=0036136591&partnerID=8YFLogxK

UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/citedby.url?scp=0036136591&partnerID=8YFLogxK

U2 - 10.1148/radiol.2221001385

DO - 10.1148/radiol.2221001385

M3 - Article

C2 - 11756714

AN - SCOPUS:0036136591

VL - 222

SP - 114

EP - 119

JO - Radiology

JF - Radiology

SN - 0033-8419

IS - 1

ER -

Testicular volume: Comparison of orchidometer and US measurements in dogs

Abstract

Keywords

ASJC Scopus subject areas

Access to Document

Other files and links

Cite this