Diagnosing Septate Uterus Using Three-Dimensional Ultrasound Using Three Different Classifications: An Interobserver and Intraobserver Agreement Study

Detalhes bibliográficos
Autor(a) principal: Peixoto,Carla
Data de Publicação: 2021
Outros Autores: Castro,Maite, Carriles,Isabel, Arriba,Maria de, Lapresa,Victoria, Alcazar,Juan Luis
Tipo de documento: Artigo
Idioma: eng
Título da fonte: Revista brasileira de ginecologia e obstetrícia (Online)
Texto Completo: http://old.scielo.br/scielo.php?script=sci_arttext&pid=S0100-72032021001200911
Resumo: Abstract Objective Currently, there are up to three different classifications for diagnosing septate uterus. The interobserver agreement among them has been poorly assessed. To assess the interobserver agreement of nonexpert sonographers for classifying septate uterus using the European Society of Human Reproduction and Embryology/European Society for Gynaecological Endoscopy (ESHRE/ESGE), American Society for Reproductive Medicine (ASRM), and Congenital Uterine Malformations by Experts (CUME) classifications. Methods A total of 50 three-dimensional (3D) volumes of a nonconsecutive series of women with suspected uterine malformation were used. Two nonexpert examiners evaluated a single 3D volume of the uterus of each woman, blinded to each other. The following measurements were performed: indentation depth, indentation angle, uterine fundal wall thickness, external fundal indentation, and indentation-to-wall-thickness (I:WT) ratio. Each observer had to assign a diagnosis in each case, according to the three classification systems (ESHRE/ESGE, ASRM, and CUME). The interobserver agreement regarding the ESHRE/ESGE, ASRM, and CUME classifications was assessed using the Cohen weighted kappa index (k). Agreement regarding the three classifications (ASRM versus ESHRE/ESGE, ASRM versus CUME, ESHRE/ESGE versus CUME) was also assessed. Results The interobserver agreement between the 2 nonexpert examiners was good for the ESHRE/ESGE (k = 0.74; 95% confidence interval [CI]: 0.55–0.92) and very good for the ASRM and CUME classification systems (k = 0.95; 95%CI: 0.86–1.00; and k = 0.91; 95%CI: 0.79–1.00, respectively). Agreement between the ESHRE/ESGE and ASRM classifications was moderate for both examiners. Agreement between the ESHRE/ESGE and CUME classifications was moderate for examiner 1 and good for examiner 2. Agreement between the ASRM and CUME classifications was good for both examiners. Conclusion The three classifications have good (ESHRE/ESGE) or very good (ASRM and CUME) interobserver agreement. Agreement between the ASRM and CUME classifications was higher than that for the ESHRE/ESGE and ASRM and ESHRE/ESGE and CUME classifications.
id FEBRASGO-1_fa89b815d9bb67d9a343a191186b7f59
oai_identifier_str oai:scielo:S0100-72032021001200911
network_acronym_str FEBRASGO-1
network_name_str Revista brasileira de ginecologia e obstetrícia (Online)
repository_id_str
spelling Diagnosing Septate Uterus Using Three-Dimensional Ultrasound Using Three Different Classifications: An Interobserver and Intraobserver Agreement Studyuterusultrasonographycongenital anomalyAbstract Objective Currently, there are up to three different classifications for diagnosing septate uterus. The interobserver agreement among them has been poorly assessed. To assess the interobserver agreement of nonexpert sonographers for classifying septate uterus using the European Society of Human Reproduction and Embryology/European Society for Gynaecological Endoscopy (ESHRE/ESGE), American Society for Reproductive Medicine (ASRM), and Congenital Uterine Malformations by Experts (CUME) classifications. Methods A total of 50 three-dimensional (3D) volumes of a nonconsecutive series of women with suspected uterine malformation were used. Two nonexpert examiners evaluated a single 3D volume of the uterus of each woman, blinded to each other. The following measurements were performed: indentation depth, indentation angle, uterine fundal wall thickness, external fundal indentation, and indentation-to-wall-thickness (I:WT) ratio. Each observer had to assign a diagnosis in each case, according to the three classification systems (ESHRE/ESGE, ASRM, and CUME). The interobserver agreement regarding the ESHRE/ESGE, ASRM, and CUME classifications was assessed using the Cohen weighted kappa index (k). Agreement regarding the three classifications (ASRM versus ESHRE/ESGE, ASRM versus CUME, ESHRE/ESGE versus CUME) was also assessed. Results The interobserver agreement between the 2 nonexpert examiners was good for the ESHRE/ESGE (k = 0.74; 95% confidence interval [CI]: 0.55–0.92) and very good for the ASRM and CUME classification systems (k = 0.95; 95%CI: 0.86–1.00; and k = 0.91; 95%CI: 0.79–1.00, respectively). Agreement between the ESHRE/ESGE and ASRM classifications was moderate for both examiners. Agreement between the ESHRE/ESGE and CUME classifications was moderate for examiner 1 and good for examiner 2. Agreement between the ASRM and CUME classifications was good for both examiners. Conclusion The three classifications have good (ESHRE/ESGE) or very good (ASRM and CUME) interobserver agreement. Agreement between the ASRM and CUME classifications was higher than that for the ESHRE/ESGE and ASRM and ESHRE/ESGE and CUME classifications.Federação Brasileira das Sociedades de Ginecologia e Obstetrícia2021-12-01info:eu-repo/semantics/articleinfo:eu-repo/semantics/publishedVersiontext/htmlhttp://old.scielo.br/scielo.php?script=sci_arttext&pid=S0100-72032021001200911Revista Brasileira de Ginecologia e Obstetrícia v.43 n.12 2021reponame:Revista brasileira de ginecologia e obstetrícia (Online)instname:Federação Brasileira das Sociedades de Ginecologia e Obstetrícia (FEBRASGO)instacron:FEBRASGO10.1055/s-0041-1740271info:eu-repo/semantics/openAccessPeixoto,CarlaCastro,MaiteCarriles,IsabelArriba,Maria deLapresa,VictoriaAlcazar,Juan Luiseng2022-01-21T00:00:00Zoai:scielo:S0100-72032021001200911Revistahttp://www.scielo.br/rbgohttps://old.scielo.br/oai/scielo-oai.phppublicações@febrasgo.org.br||rbgo@fmrp.usp.br1806-93390100-7203opendoar:2022-01-21T00:00Revista brasileira de ginecologia e obstetrícia (Online) - Federação Brasileira das Sociedades de Ginecologia e Obstetrícia (FEBRASGO)false
dc.title.none.fl_str_mv Diagnosing Septate Uterus Using Three-Dimensional Ultrasound Using Three Different Classifications: An Interobserver and Intraobserver Agreement Study
title Diagnosing Septate Uterus Using Three-Dimensional Ultrasound Using Three Different Classifications: An Interobserver and Intraobserver Agreement Study
spellingShingle Diagnosing Septate Uterus Using Three-Dimensional Ultrasound Using Three Different Classifications: An Interobserver and Intraobserver Agreement Study
Peixoto,Carla
uterus
ultrasonography
congenital anomaly
title_short Diagnosing Septate Uterus Using Three-Dimensional Ultrasound Using Three Different Classifications: An Interobserver and Intraobserver Agreement Study
title_full Diagnosing Septate Uterus Using Three-Dimensional Ultrasound Using Three Different Classifications: An Interobserver and Intraobserver Agreement Study
title_fullStr Diagnosing Septate Uterus Using Three-Dimensional Ultrasound Using Three Different Classifications: An Interobserver and Intraobserver Agreement Study
title_full_unstemmed Diagnosing Septate Uterus Using Three-Dimensional Ultrasound Using Three Different Classifications: An Interobserver and Intraobserver Agreement Study
title_sort Diagnosing Septate Uterus Using Three-Dimensional Ultrasound Using Three Different Classifications: An Interobserver and Intraobserver Agreement Study
author Peixoto,Carla
author_facet Peixoto,Carla
Castro,Maite
Carriles,Isabel
Arriba,Maria de
Lapresa,Victoria
Alcazar,Juan Luis
author_role author
author2 Castro,Maite
Carriles,Isabel
Arriba,Maria de
Lapresa,Victoria
Alcazar,Juan Luis
author2_role author
author
author
author
author
dc.contributor.author.fl_str_mv Peixoto,Carla
Castro,Maite
Carriles,Isabel
Arriba,Maria de
Lapresa,Victoria
Alcazar,Juan Luis
dc.subject.por.fl_str_mv uterus
ultrasonography
congenital anomaly
topic uterus
ultrasonography
congenital anomaly
description Abstract Objective Currently, there are up to three different classifications for diagnosing septate uterus. The interobserver agreement among them has been poorly assessed. To assess the interobserver agreement of nonexpert sonographers for classifying septate uterus using the European Society of Human Reproduction and Embryology/European Society for Gynaecological Endoscopy (ESHRE/ESGE), American Society for Reproductive Medicine (ASRM), and Congenital Uterine Malformations by Experts (CUME) classifications. Methods A total of 50 three-dimensional (3D) volumes of a nonconsecutive series of women with suspected uterine malformation were used. Two nonexpert examiners evaluated a single 3D volume of the uterus of each woman, blinded to each other. The following measurements were performed: indentation depth, indentation angle, uterine fundal wall thickness, external fundal indentation, and indentation-to-wall-thickness (I:WT) ratio. Each observer had to assign a diagnosis in each case, according to the three classification systems (ESHRE/ESGE, ASRM, and CUME). The interobserver agreement regarding the ESHRE/ESGE, ASRM, and CUME classifications was assessed using the Cohen weighted kappa index (k). Agreement regarding the three classifications (ASRM versus ESHRE/ESGE, ASRM versus CUME, ESHRE/ESGE versus CUME) was also assessed. Results The interobserver agreement between the 2 nonexpert examiners was good for the ESHRE/ESGE (k = 0.74; 95% confidence interval [CI]: 0.55–0.92) and very good for the ASRM and CUME classification systems (k = 0.95; 95%CI: 0.86–1.00; and k = 0.91; 95%CI: 0.79–1.00, respectively). Agreement between the ESHRE/ESGE and ASRM classifications was moderate for both examiners. Agreement between the ESHRE/ESGE and CUME classifications was moderate for examiner 1 and good for examiner 2. Agreement between the ASRM and CUME classifications was good for both examiners. Conclusion The three classifications have good (ESHRE/ESGE) or very good (ASRM and CUME) interobserver agreement. Agreement between the ASRM and CUME classifications was higher than that for the ESHRE/ESGE and ASRM and ESHRE/ESGE and CUME classifications.
publishDate 2021
dc.date.none.fl_str_mv 2021-12-01
dc.type.driver.fl_str_mv info:eu-repo/semantics/article
dc.type.status.fl_str_mv info:eu-repo/semantics/publishedVersion
format article
status_str publishedVersion
dc.identifier.uri.fl_str_mv http://old.scielo.br/scielo.php?script=sci_arttext&pid=S0100-72032021001200911
url http://old.scielo.br/scielo.php?script=sci_arttext&pid=S0100-72032021001200911
dc.language.iso.fl_str_mv eng
language eng
dc.relation.none.fl_str_mv 10.1055/s-0041-1740271
dc.rights.driver.fl_str_mv info:eu-repo/semantics/openAccess
eu_rights_str_mv openAccess
dc.format.none.fl_str_mv text/html
dc.publisher.none.fl_str_mv Federação Brasileira das Sociedades de Ginecologia e Obstetrícia
publisher.none.fl_str_mv Federação Brasileira das Sociedades de Ginecologia e Obstetrícia
dc.source.none.fl_str_mv Revista Brasileira de Ginecologia e Obstetrícia v.43 n.12 2021
reponame:Revista brasileira de ginecologia e obstetrícia (Online)
instname:Federação Brasileira das Sociedades de Ginecologia e Obstetrícia (FEBRASGO)
instacron:FEBRASGO
instname_str Federação Brasileira das Sociedades de Ginecologia e Obstetrícia (FEBRASGO)
instacron_str FEBRASGO
institution FEBRASGO
reponame_str Revista brasileira de ginecologia e obstetrícia (Online)
collection Revista brasileira de ginecologia e obstetrícia (Online)
repository.name.fl_str_mv Revista brasileira de ginecologia e obstetrícia (Online) - Federação Brasileira das Sociedades de Ginecologia e Obstetrícia (FEBRASGO)
repository.mail.fl_str_mv publicações@febrasgo.org.br||rbgo@fmrp.usp.br
_version_ 1754115945906831360