Abstract
Three-dimensional ultrasound (3D US) is a modality of choice for prenatal diagnosis of congenital malformations. But 3D-four-dimensional US(4D US) is of utmost importance also to achieve pregnancy. 3D US plays an important role for diagnosis of PCO, to assess ovarian reserve and response and thus to decide optimum stimulation protocols. It adds to the information on follicular maturity and endometrial receptivity, thus improving the chances to achieve pregnancy for patients under treatment for fertility. 3D hystero-contrast-salpingography (HyCoSy) has also proved itself to be one of the best modalities for assessment of tubal patency. In this article, the role of 3D and 4D US is discussed for the following. I. Pretreatment assessment of the females desiring fertility which includes assessment of uterus and fallopian tubes. II. Monitoring of infertile females undergoing treatment. III. Assessment of very early pregnancy – especially in abnormal locations.
Author’s statement
Conflict of interest: Authors state no conflict of interest.
Material and methods: Informed consent: Informed consent has been obtained from all individuals included in this study.
Ethical approval: The research related to human subject use has complied with all the relevant national regulations, and institutional policies, and is in accordance with the tenets of the Helsinki Declaration, and has been approved by the authors’ institutional review board or equivalent committee.
References
[1] Shipp TD. Ultrasound examination in obstetrics and gynecology. UpToDate. 2012; accessed July 9, 2012.Search in Google Scholar
[2] Jayaprakasan J, Chan YY, Sur S, Deb S, Clewes JS, Raine-Fenning NJ. Prevalence of uterine anomalies and their impact on early pregnancy in women conceiving after assisted reproduction treatment. Ultrasound Obstet Gynecol. 2011;37:727–32.10.1002/uog.8968Search in Google Scholar
[3] Carmina B, Rocio C, Dolores D, Eva L, Laura RL. Three dimensional ultrasonography in the diagnosis of Mullerian duct anomalies. Donald school J Ultrasound Obstet Gynecol. 2009;3:21–30.10.5005/jp-journals-10009-1005Search in Google Scholar
[4] Richman TS, Viscomi GN, de Chemey A, Polan ML, Alcebo LO. Fallopian tubal patency assessed by ultrasound following fluid injection. Radiology. 1984;152:507–10.10.1148/radiology.152.2.6539931Search in Google Scholar
[5] Panchal S, Nagori CB. Ultrasound in infertility and gynecology text and atlas. New Delhi, India: Jaypee – The Health Sciences Publisher; 2015.Search in Google Scholar
[6] Barbot J. Hysteroscopy and hysterography. Obstet Gynecol Clin North Am. 1995;22:591–603.10.1016/S0889-8545(21)00206-0Search in Google Scholar
[7] Exacoustos C, Brienza L, Di Giovanni A, Szabolcs B, Romanini V, Zupi E, et al. Adenomyosis: three dimensional sonographic findings of the junctional zone and correlation with histology. Ultrasound Obstet Gynecol. 2011;37:471–9.10.1002/uog.8900Search in Google Scholar
[8] Mavrelos D, Naftalin J, Hoo W, Ben-Nagi J, Holland T, JurKovic D. Preoperative assessment of submucous fibroids by 3D saline contrast sonohysterography. Ultrasound Obstet Gynecol. 2011;38:350–4.10.1002/uog.9049Search in Google Scholar
[9] Exacoustos C, Zupi E, Romanini ME, Szabolcs B, Amoroso C, Gabardi C, et al. Three dimensional coded contrast imaging: a new ultrasound approach to evaluate tubal patency. Ultrasound Obstet Gynecol. 2008;32:308–97.10.1002/uog.5658Search in Google Scholar
[10] Dewailly D, Robert Y, Helin I, Ardaens Y, Thomas-Desrousseaux P, Lemaitre L, et al. Ovarian stromal hypertrophy in hyperandrogenic women. Clin Endocrinol (Oxf). 1994;41:557–62.10.1111/j.1365-2265.1994.tb01818.xSearch in Google Scholar
[11] Wu MH, Tang HH, Hsu CC, Wang ST, Huang KE. The role of three- dimensional ultrasonographic images in ovarian measurement. Fertil Steril. 1998;69:1152–5.10.1016/S0015-0282(98)00092-2Search in Google Scholar
[12] Ardaens Y, Robert Y, Lemaitre L, Fossati P, Dewailly D. Polycystic ovarian disease: contribution of transvaginal endosonography and reassessment of ultrasonographic diagnosis. Fertil Steril. 1991;55:1062–8.10.1016/S0015-0282(16)54353-2Search in Google Scholar
[13] Franks S, Webber LJ, Goh M, Valentine A, White DM, Conway GS, et al. Ovarian morphology is a marker of heritable biochemical traits in sisters with polycystic ovaries. J Clin Endocrinol Metab. 2008;93:3396–402.10.1210/jc.2008-0369Search in Google Scholar
[14] Buckett WM, Bouzayen R, Watkin KL, Tulandi T, Tan SL. Ovarian stromal echogenecity in women with normal and polycystic ovaries. Hum Reprod. 1999;14:618–21.10.1093/humrep/14.3.618Search in Google Scholar
[15] Raine-Fenning NJ, Campbell BK, Clewes JS, Johnson IR. The interobserver reliability of ovarian volume measurement is improved with three-dimensional ultrasound, but dependent upon technique. Ultrasound Med Biol. 2003;29:1685–90.10.1016/S0301-5629(03)01068-8Search in Google Scholar
[16] Lam PM, Johnson IR, Raine-Fenning NJ. Three-dimensional ultrasound features of the polycystic ovary and the effect of different phenotypic expressions on these parameters. Hum Reprod. 2007;22:3116–23.10.1093/humrep/dem218Search in Google Scholar
[17] Deb S, Jayaprakasan K, Campbell BK, Clewes JS, Johnson IR, Raine-Fenning NJ. Intraobserver and interobserver reliability of automated antral follicle counts made using three-dimensional ultrasound and SonoAVC. Ultrasound Obstet Gynecol. 2009;33:477–83.10.1002/uog.6310Search in Google Scholar
[18] Deb S, Campbell BK, Clewes JS, Rainne Fenning NJ. Quantitative analysis of antral follicle number and size: a comparision of two dimensional and automated three dimensional ultrasound techniques. Ultrasound Obstet Gynecol. 2010;35:354–60.10.1002/uog.7505Search in Google Scholar
[19] Kupesic S, Kurjak A. Predictors of IVF outcome by three dimensional ultrasound. Hum Reprod. 2002;17:950–55.10.1093/humrep/17.4.950Search in Google Scholar
[20] Ng EH, Chan CC, Yeung WS, Ho PC. Effect of age on ovarian stromal flow measured by three-dimensional ultrasound with power Doppler in Chinese women with proven fertility. Hum Reprod. 2004;19:2132–7.10.1093/humrep/deh387Search in Google Scholar
[21] Raine-Fenning NL, Lam PM. Assessment of ovarian reserve using the inversion mode. Ultrasound Obstet Gynecol. 2006;27:104–6.10.1002/uog.2683Search in Google Scholar
[22] Zaidi J, Barber J, Kyei-Mensah A, Bekir J, Campbell S, Tan SL. Relationship of ovarian stromal blood flow at baseline ultrasound to subsequent follicular response in an in vitro fertilization program. Obstet Gynecol. 1996;88:779–84.10.1016/0029-7844(96)00316-XSearch in Google Scholar
[23] Merce LT, Barco MJ, Bau S, Troyano JM. Prediction of ovarian response and IVF/ICSI outcome by three-dimensional ultrasonography and power Doppler angiography. Eur J Obstet Gynecol Reprod Biol. 2007;132:93–100.10.1016/j.ejogrb.2006.07.051Search in Google Scholar
[24] Kyei-Mensah A, Zaidi J, Pittrof R, Shaker A, Campbell S, Tan SL. Transvaginal three dimensional ultrasound reproducibility of ovarian and endometrial volume measurements. Fertil Steril. 1996;66:718–22.10.1016/S0015-0282(16)58624-5Search in Google Scholar
[25] Panchal SY, Nagori CB. Can 3D PD be a better tool for assessing the pre HCG follicle and endometrium? A randomized study of 500 cases. Presented at 16th World Congress on Ultrasound in Obstetrics and Gynecology, 2006, London. J Ultrasound Obstet Gynecol. 2006;28:504.10.1002/uog.3361Search in Google Scholar
[26] Poehl M, Hohlagschwandtner M, Doerner V, Dillinger B, Feichtinger W. Cumulus assessment by three dimensional ultrasound for invitro fertilzation. Ultrasound Obstet Gynecol. 2000;16:251–3.10.1046/j.1469-0705.2000.00270.xSearch in Google Scholar
[27] Feichtinger W. Transvaginal three dimensional imaging for evaluation and treatment of infertility. In: Merz E, editor. 3D ultrasound in obstetrics and Gyneacology. Philadelphia: Lipincott Williams & Wilkins; 1998. p. 37–43.Search in Google Scholar
[28] Van Blerkom J, Davis P, Alexander S. Inner mitochondrial membrane potential (DeltaPsim), cytoplasmic ATP content and free Ca2+ level in metaphaseII mouse oocytes. Hum Reprod. 2003;18:2429–40.10.1093/humrep/deg466Search in Google Scholar
[29] Wittmack FM, Kreger DO, Blasco L, Tureck RW, Mastroianni L Jr, Lessey BA. Effect of follicular size on oocyte retrieval, fertilization, cleavage and embryo quality in in vitro fertilization cycles: a 6 year data collection. Fertil Steril. 1994;62:1205–10.10.1016/S0015-0282(16)57186-6Search in Google Scholar
[30] Nagori C, Panchal S. Endometrial vascularity: its relation to implantation rates. Int J Infertility Fetal Med. 2012;3: 48–50.10.5005/jp-journals-10016-1040Search in Google Scholar
[31] Yang J-H, Wu MY, Chen CD, Jiang MC, Ho HN, Yang YS. Association of endometrial blood flow as determined by a modified colour Doppler technique with subsequent outcome of in-vitro fertilization. Hum Reprod. 1999;14:1606–10.10.1093/humrep/14.6.1606Search in Google Scholar
[32] Wu HM, Chiang CH, Huang HY, Chao AS, Wang HS, Soong YK. Detection of subendometrial vascularization flow index by three dimensional ultrasound may be useful for predicting pregnancy rate for patients undergoing in vitro fertilization- embryo transfer. Fertil Steril. 2003;79:507–11.10.1016/S0015-0282(02)04698-8Search in Google Scholar
[33] Kyei-Mensah A, Zaidi J, Pittrof R, Shaker A, Campbell S, Tan SL. Transvaginal three dimensional ultrasound: accuracy of follicular volume measurements. Fertil Steril. 1996;65:371–6.10.1016/S0015-0282(16)58102-3Search in Google Scholar
©2017 Walter de Gruyter GmbH, Berlin/Boston
