ArticlePediatric radiology2025
3D ultrasound volume quantification for pediatric urinary tract dilation: a semi-automated segmentation software inter-rater analysis.
Article in Pediatric radiology, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.
What it found
Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.
The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.
The trial behind it
Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.
Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.
Who cites it
0 citing papers in PubMed.
No citing paper in PubMed yet.
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
12 authors.
Funding
Abstract
objectiveWe determined the reliability of a three-dimensional (3D) ultrasound (US) segmentation software for evaluating volumetric hydronephrosis index (HI) and renal parenchymal and pelvicalyceal volume in children with urinary tract dilation (UTD). MATERIAL AND
methodsFrom 1/2019 to 9/2023, children clinically scheduled for a renal imaging exam to assess UTD at a single center were prospectively enrolled. They underwent a dedicated two-dimensional (2D) and 3D US renal exam. A UTD score was assigned per kidney from the 2D images based on the 2014 consensus classification by an experienced pediatric radiologist. From the 3D dataset, the renal parenchyma and collecting system were independently segmented by three trained raters using a semi-automated software. From this segmentation, the kidney parenchymal and pelvicalyceal volume, dimensions, and volumetric HI values were analyzed using the intraclass correlation coefficient to grade inter-rater reliability.
resultsForty-eight studies from 47 patients were included (65% male; median age 24 months; IQR 61 months). From these, 46 right and 40 left kidneys were chosen based on image quality. Twenty-nine (33.7%) kidneys had no UTD, 10 (11.6%) had UTD P1, 23 (26.7%) had UTD P2, and 24 (27.9%) had UTD P3. Inter-rater reliability was almost perfect across all parameters, with estimates ranging from 0.85 to 0.95. In sub-analysis of kidneys with UTD P2 and UTD P3, volumetric HI had the lowest inter-rater agreement (0.75 and 0.66, respectively).
conclusionsSemi-automated 3D US segmentation for kidneys with UTD can reliably assess renal dimensions, parenchymal and collecting system volumes, and volumetric HI among raters.
Indexed as
Identifiers
39692885What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.