ABSTRACT
The goal of this study was to develop anobjective method for evaluation of ovarian follicle wallblood flow in cattle. Two subjective methods were used:(I) real-time ultrasound evaluations performed by oneoperator in the barn and (II) video clip evaluationsperformed by four operators in the laboratory. Thefollowing objective methods evaluated in the laboratorywere used for comparison: (I) percentage of follicle wallcircumference under blood flow (WUF) and (II) pixelarea of color-Doppler signals. Cows (n = 21) weresubmitted to a synchronization protocol, follicles ≥7 mmwere measured, and blood flow was evaluated every 12 huntil ovulation using color-Doppler ultrasonography. Nodifference (P > 0.05) was observed among laboratoryoperators from day 2 of training onwards. Therefore,an average score of all operators was used forcomparisons among different methods. Both subjectiveand objective methods of evaluation showed anincrease (P < 0.0001) in follicle blood flow over time.Higher (P < 0.001) correlations were obtained betweenWUF and subjective laboratory evaluation thanbetween WUF and pixel area or WUF and subjectivebarn data. Higher (P < 0.0003) correlation coefficientswere observed for WUF than for the pixel area whencompared with the barn (r = 0.70 vs. r = 0.42) orlaboratory (r = 0.84 vs. r = 0.62) data. Subjectiveevaluations at the laboratory and barn producedstronger correlations with WUF (P < 0.0008) than withpixel area (P < 0.01). In conclusion, WUF is aneffective and reliable method for objective evaluationof follicle wall blood flow in cows.
Subject(s)
Female , Animals , Cattle , Cattle/embryology , Cattle/blood , UltrasonographyABSTRACT
The goal of this study was to develop anobjective method for evaluation of ovarian follicle wallblood flow in cattle. Two subjective methods were used:(I) real-time ultrasound evaluations performed by oneoperator in the barn and (II) video clip evaluationsperformed by four operators in the laboratory. Thefollowing objective methods evaluated in the laboratorywere used for comparison: (I) percentage of follicle wallcircumference under blood flow (WUF) and (II) pixelarea of color-Doppler signals. Cows (n = 21) weresubmitted to a synchronization protocol, follicles ≥7 mmwere measured, and blood flow was evaluated every 12 huntil ovulation using color-Doppler ultrasonography. Nodifference (P > 0.05) was observed among laboratoryoperators from day 2 of training onwards. Therefore,an average score of all operators was used forcomparisons among different methods. Both subjectiveand objective methods of evaluation showed anincrease (P < 0.0001) in follicle blood flow over time.Higher (P < 0.001) correlations were obtained betweenWUF and subjective laboratory evaluation thanbetween WUF and pixel area or WUF and subjectivebarn data. Higher (P < 0.0003) correlation coefficientswere observed for WUF than for the pixel area whencompared with the barn (r = 0.70 vs. r = 0.42) orlaboratory (r = 0.84 vs. r = 0.62) data. Subjectiveevaluations at the laboratory and barn producedstronger correlations with WUF (P < 0.0008) than withpixel area (P < 0.01). In conclusion, WUF is aneffective and reliable method for objective evaluationof follicle wall blood flow in cows.(AU)