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

Research output: Contribution to journalArticle

115 Citations (Scopus)

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 languageEnglish
Pages (from-to)114-119
Number of pages6
JournalRadiology
Volume222
Issue number1
StatePublished - Jan 15 2002
Externally publishedYes

Fingerprint

Transducers
Testis
Dogs
Canidae
Linear Models
Orchiectomy
Weights and Measures

Keywords

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

ASJC Scopus subject areas

  • Radiological and Ultrasound Technology

Cite this

Paltiel, H. J., Diamond, D. A., Di Canzio, J., Zurakowski, D., Borer, J. G., & Atala, A. (2002). Testicular volume: Comparison of orchidometer and US measurements in dogs. Radiology, 222(1), 114-119.

Testicular volume : Comparison of orchidometer and US measurements in dogs. / Paltiel, H. J.; Diamond, D. A.; Di Canzio, J.; Zurakowski, D.; Borer, J. G.; Atala, A.

In: Radiology, Vol. 222, No. 1, 15.01.2002, p. 114-119.

Research output: Contribution to journalArticle

Paltiel, HJ, Diamond, DA, Di Canzio, J, Zurakowski, D, Borer, JG & Atala, A 2002, 'Testicular volume: Comparison of orchidometer and US measurements in dogs', Radiology, vol. 222, no. 1, pp. 114-119.
Paltiel HJ, Diamond DA, Di Canzio J, Zurakowski D, Borer JG, Atala A. Testicular volume: Comparison of orchidometer and US measurements in dogs. Radiology. 2002 Jan 15;222(1):114-119.
Paltiel, H. J. ; Diamond, D. A. ; Di Canzio, J. ; Zurakowski, D. ; Borer, J. G. ; Atala, A. / Testicular volume : Comparison of orchidometer and US measurements in dogs. In: Radiology. 2002 ; Vol. 222, No. 1. pp. 114-119.
@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 = "1",
day = "15",
language = "English",
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 - 2002/1/15

Y1 - 2002/1/15

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

M3 - Article

VL - 222

SP - 114

EP - 119

JO - Radiology

JF - Radiology

SN - 0033-8419

IS - 1

ER -