Comparison of 3-dimensional with 2-dimensional saline infusion sonohysterograms for the evaluation of intrauterine abnormalities.

作者: Stephanie Terry , Erika Banks , Kemoy Harris , Roger Duvivier , Pe'er Dar

DOI: 10.1002/JCU.20561

关键词: ConcordanceMedicineStatistical significanceHysteroscopyGold standard (test)UltrasoundRetrospective cohort studyRadiologyMedical diagnosisYoung adultSurgery

摘要: Objective. To compare 3-dimensional saline infusion sonohysterography (3DSIS) with 2-dimensional (2DSIS) using hysteroscopy and histologic diagnosis as the gold standard. Method. A retrospective analysis of all SIS examination performed between July 1, 2005 April 30, 2007 in our gynecological sonographic unit. 2DSIS or 3DSIS techniques were used randomly. Management decisions operative procedures done by referring provider. Patients that had diagnostic complete evaluation included. Concordance various assessment methods well sensitivity specificity compared 3DSIS. Student's t test chi-square for statistical analysis. p < 0.05 was considered statistically significant. Result. Of 804 patients SIS, 125 met inclusion criteria. Patient median age 48 (range 19–82). Also, 77 premenopausal, postmenopausal. Furthermore, 43 82 found to correlate hysteroscopic findings more often than (p 0.05). A trend higher different uterine pathologies seen, but it did not reach significance. No difference pathologic diagnoses. Conclusion. 3DSIS correlated better 2DSIS. Specificity appears be larger-scale studies are needed confirm this finding. © 2009 Wiley Periodicals, Inc. J Clin Ultrasound

参考文章(11)
R. La Torre, M. Mazzocco, M. Sansone, R. Prosperi Porta, I. Pergolini, E. V. Cosmi, C. De Felice, C. Franco, Three-dimensional sonography and hysterosalpingosonography in the diagnosis of uterine anomalies. Clinical and Experimental Obstetrics & Gynecology. ,vol. 30, pp. 190- 192 ,(2003)
A S Lev-Toaff, L W Pinheiro, G Bega, A B Kurtz, B B Goldberg, Three-dimensional multiplanar sonohysterography: comparison with conventional two-dimensional sonohysterography and X-ray hysterosalpingography. Journal of Ultrasound in Medicine. ,vol. 20, pp. 295- 306 ,(2001) , 10.7863/JUM.2001.20.4.295
Ruth C. Carlos, Robert L. Bree, Paul H. Abrahamse, A.Mark Fendrick, Cost-Effectiveness of Saline-Assisted Hysterosonography and Office Hysteroscopy in the Evaluation of Postmenopausal Bleeding Academic Radiology. ,vol. 8, pp. 835- 844 ,(2001) , 10.1016/S1076-6332(03)80761-4
FPHLJ Dijkhuizen, BWJ Mol, MY Bongers, HAM Brölmann, APM Heintz, None, Cost-effectiveness of transvaginal sonography and saline infused sonography in the evaluation of menorrhagia. International Journal of Gynecology & Obstetrics. ,vol. 83, pp. 45- 52 ,(2003) , 10.1016/S0020-7292(03)00080-8
Cornelis D de Kroon, Geertruida H de Bock, Sandra WM Dieben, Frank Willem Jansen, None, Saline contrast hysterosonography in abnormal uterine bleeding: a systematic review and meta-analysis British Journal of Obstetrics and Gynaecology. ,vol. 110, pp. 938- 947 ,(2003) , 10.1111/J.1471-0528.2003.02472.X
C. P. Spencer, M. I. Whitehead, Endometrial assessment re-visited. British Journal of Obstetrics and Gynaecology. ,vol. 106, pp. 623- 632 ,(1999) , 10.1111/J.1471-0528.1999.TB08358.X
Laila D De Vries, F Paul HLJ Dijkhuizen, Ben WJ Mol, Hans AM Brölmann, Eveline Moret, A Peter M Heintz, None, Comparison of transvaginal sonography, saline infusion sonography, and hysteroscopy in premenopausal women with abnormal uterine bleeding Journal of Clinical Ultrasound. ,vol. 28, pp. 217- 223 ,(2000) , 10.1002/(SICI)1097-0096(200006)28:5<217::AID-JCU2>3.0.CO;2-B
Richard J. Gimpelson, Thomas R. Whalen, Hysteroscopy as gold standard for evaluation of abnormal uterine bleeding. American Journal of Obstetrics and Gynecology. ,vol. 173, pp. 1637- 1638 ,(1995) , 10.1016/0002-9378(95)90670-3
Fernando Bonilla-Musoles, Francisco Raga, Newton G. Osborne, Javier Blanes, F. Coelho, Three-Dimensional Hysterosonography for the Study of Endometrial Tumors: Comparison with Conventional Transvaginal Sonography, Hysterosalpingography, and Hysteroscopy Gynecologic Oncology. ,vol. 65, pp. 245- 252 ,(1997) , 10.1006/GYNO.1997.4678