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 |
|---|---|
| Pages (from-to) | 114-119 |
| Number of pages | 6 |
| Journal | Radiology |
| Volume | 222 |
| Issue number | 1 |
| State | Published - Jan 15 2002 |
| Externally published | Yes |
Fingerprint
Keywords
- Animals
- Experimental study
- Testis, US
- Ultrasound (US), experimental studies
ASJC Scopus subject areas
- Radiological and Ultrasound Technology
Cite this
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 journal › Article
}
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 -