The aim was to compare the reproducibility of the traditional manual analysis of the right ventricle (RV) strain with a semi-automatic analysis (an automatic method with the possibility of adjustment) in speckle-tracking echocardiography (STE).

Materials and methods. Evaluation of RV by speckle-tracking echocardiography was performed in 71 patients with two approaches: manual (Q-Analysis) and semi-automatic (AutoStrainRV). Such parameters as RV global longitudinal strain (RVGLS), RV longitudinal free wall strain (RVLFWS), RV longitudinal free wall segmental strain, and the amplitude of movement of the tricuspid annular plane systolic excursion (TAPSE) were compared.

Results. There were no significant differences between the values of RVGLS (21.9 ± 4.7% vs. 21.6 ± 3.6%, p = 0.488, respectively) and RVLFWS (24.6 ± 5.1% vs. 25.3 ± 4.6%, p = 0.212, respectively) obtained by manual and semi-automatic strain analysis. The significant differences were revealed in the values of RVLFWS in the basal and middle segments estimated by a semi-automatic method and by a manual method (22.6 ± 7.1% vs. 27.0 ± 10.1%, p < 0.002, and 23.8 ± 5.9% vs. 25.8 ± 8.0%, p < 0.05, respectively). Bland-Altman analysis showed mean bias for RVGLS -0.31 (95% CI: -7.62–7.00) and for RVLFWS - 0.70 (95% CI: -8.44–9.83). The values of the TAPSE obtained by semi-automatic analysis were lower and significantly different from the values calculated in the M-mode (22.6 ± 3.8 mm vs. 24.9 ± 4.5 mm, p < 0.001). Strain analysis by the semi-automatic method requires less time than the manual method (22.9 ± 4.5 seconds vs. 38.9 ± 7.8 seconds, p < 0.05).

Conclusions. The choice of approach for RV strain assessment (manual or semi-automatic) does not significantly affect the values of RV strain but may affect the result of segmental RV strain in the basal and middle segments. The semi-automatic strain analysis of RV provides a faster and more reproducible assessment of RV function. The values of the TAPSE by semi-automatic strain analysis are significantly lower compared to the values of the TAPSE in M-mode.

These guidelines may have been translated, from the originals published by ISUOG, by recognized experts in the field and have been independently verified by reviewers with a relevant first language. Although all reasonable endeavors have been made to ensure that no fundamental meaning has been changed the process of translation may naturally result in small variations in words or terminology and so ISUOG makes no claim that translated guidelines can be considered to be an exact copy of the original and accepts no liability for the consequence of any variations. The guidelines are only officially approved by the ISUOG in their English published form.

Objective: to compare the uterine corpus and endometrium volumes measured in 2D and 3D modes.

Material and methods. The observational retrospective cohort study included 154 women of reproductive age with no myometrial or endometrial pathology. Pelvic ultrasound was performed with the use of the Affiniti70 (Philips, Netherlands) with a multifrequency 3D intracavitary probe. The uterine corpus volume and endometrial volume were measured both in 2D and 3D modes, followed by a calculation of the percentage ratio of endometrial volume to uterine corpus volume (endometrial/uterine corporeal volume ratio (EV/UCV)).

Results. The values of uterine corpus volume measured in 3D mode were higher than in 2D mode, with a relative measurement error of 7.2%. The strength of the correlation turned out to be very high (r = 0.91, p = 0.458). According to the Bland-Altman plot, almost all values of the volume difference in pairwise measurements fell within the interval ±1.96 SD 95%; a low average difference indicates a low systematic discrepancy in measurements, and the degree of value scatter is quite acceptable. The values of endometrium volume in 3D mode were lower than in 2D mode; the relative error in 2D mode, regardless of the cycle phase, was -35.3%. There was a strong correlation between the two measurement methods (r = 0.81), but the differences in allocations were significant (p<0.05).

Conclusion. It is permissible to use the values of the uterine corpus volume obtained in 2D mode as an analogue of 3D mode volume in routine practice, while it is not acceptable in the assessment of endometrium volume and EV/UCV.

An extensive deep infiltrating endometriosis usually requires complex and time-consuming surgical treatment, often with multidisciplinary surgery teams forming. The goal of ultrasound is to find and describe in detail, if possible, all endometriosis lesions at the preoperative stage. A structured classification is needed for a detailed description of all foci of pelvic and extrapelvic endometriosis that would be understandable to both the radiologists and the gynecological surgeon. The current version of the #Enzian classification was designed by an international team of scientists from 11 countries with vast experience in the diagnosis and treatment of endometriosis. This classification is based on a description of the location of endometriosis lesions, the depth of invasion into the pelvic organs and tissues, as well as the presence of invasion into adjacent abdominal organs and disruption of their functions. The classification provides continuity between preoperative imaging and surgical assessment of the severity of endometriosis. In this article, we tried to describe and comment in detail on the ultrasound version of this classification, illustrated by our own clinical cases. Using the #Enzian classification provides clinicians with a common “language” to describe endometriosis in a comprehensive and easily reproducible manner. The authors of this article have been using the #Enzian classification in their work for more than 2 years. Based on our existing experience, we consider the #Enzian classification not only convenient and useful, but also meets all the requirements of both a diagnostician and a surgeon.