Why sonographers struggle to meet PCOM ultrasound standards: a practical perspective
Accurate assessment of ovarian morphology remains a core component of gynaecological ultrasound practice, yet variation in technique and interpretation continues to affect diagnostic confidence across clinical settings. With increasing service pressures, expanding lists and a rising number of repeat scans for suspected polycystic ovary morphology (PCOM), the need for consistent, reproducible technique has never been greater. This article provides a focused, evidence‑based overview of PCOM for sonographers and ultrasound practitioners, supporting standardised practice in busy departments.
The piece outlines the technical parameters required for reliable follicle number per ovary (FNPO) assessment, including optimal transvaginal probe frequency, sweep methodology, cine loop acquisition and strategies to minimise double‑counting. It summarises the current diagnostic thresholds for PCOM – ≥20 follicles measuring 2-9mm or an ovarian volume of ≥10ml – and highlights the importance of consistent measurement planes and accurate volume calculation using the ellipsoid formula. The article also reinforces that ultrasound findings contribute to, but do not independently diagnose, polycystic ovary syndrome (PCOS).
Common interpretative challenges are explored, such as differentiating PCOM from multifollicular ovaries, recognising physiological stromal changes, and avoiding overestimation of ovarian volume. Practical guidance is provided on when to seek senior review, including uncertain morphology, markedly enlarged ovaries or incidental adnexal findings.
The aim is to support sonographers in applying international criteria with clarity and confidence, reduce unwarranted variation in reporting and minimise unnecessary repeat examinations. The article offers a pragmatic framework that aligns with contemporary evidence while remaining achievable within the realities of modern ultrasound workloads.
To download and read the full article as a pdf please sign up to our newsletter.
The content on this page is provided by the individuals concerned and does not represent the views or opinions of RAD Magazine.
