{'fraction_non_alphanumeric': 0.022598870056497175, 'fraction_numerical': 0.005649717514124294, 'mean_word_length': 5.683962264150943, 'pattern_counts': {'":': 0, '<': 0, '<?xml version=': 0, '>': 0, 'https://': 0, 'lorem ipsum': 0, 'www.': 0, 'xml': 0}, 'pii_count': 0, 'substrings_counts': 0, 'word_list_counts': {'cursed_substrings.json': 0, 'profanity_word_list.json': 0, 'sexual_word_list.json': 0, 'zh_pornsignals.json': 0}}
Standardization of three‐dimensional images in obstetrics and gynecology: consensus statement

Standardization of the display of ultrasound images has so far only been achieved in transabdominal two‐dimensional (2D) sonography. In contrast, there is a lack of uniformity in the demonstration of transvaginal 2D ultrasound images. The described non‐uniformity frequently leads to confusion in the assessment of an image, in particular with regard to the accurate anatomical assignment of left/right and dorsal/ventral. Three‐dimensional (3D) sonography offers a unique opportunity to avoid this confusion in the interpretation of ultrasound images, because, independent of primary volume acquisition, the volume can always be rotated so that the stored object can at all times be visualized in a known anatomical position, rendering it of no importance whether the image acquired transvaginally is demonstrated from above or from below. This will also be important in allowing fusion of ultrasound image data with computed tomographic, magnetic resonance and/or positron emission tomography images. In this article we suggest that standardization of transabdominal and transvaginal 3D images does not only provide the inexperienced physician/sonographer with a guide to spatial orientation, but also serves to avoid erroneous topographical interpretations. Copyright © 2007 ISUOG. Published by John Wiley & Sons, Ltd.