OBJECTIVE: The purpose of this study was to determine whether 3-dimensional (3D) sonography can provide a rapid, efficient, and accurate way to do a transvaginal gynecologic scan compared with traditional 2-dimensional (2D) sonography. METHODS: Thirty-five consecutive patients who underwent gynecologic sonography formed the study cohort. After a standard 2D transvaginal scan was done, including measurements of the endometrium and abnormalities, 4 volume acquisitions were obtained, encompassing the uterus (2 volumes) and the ovaries. These volumes were reviewed offline without any patient information. Endometrium and other measurements were performed on the volumes. The 2D and 3D results were compared by paired t tests. RESULTS: The mean time needed for the standard 2D scan was 2.6 minutes compared with 1.07 minutes for the 3D volume acquisitions. The mean time for the reconstruction, measurement, and interpretation of the volumes offline was 1.19 minutes. The mean time for the entire 3D examination (both parts) was 2.26 minutes (P = .047, comparing 2D with total 3D). There was no significant difference between the measurements of the endometrium, fibroids, and ovarian cysts when comparing 2D and reconstructed 3D images. Two-dimensional and 3D sonography differed little in their ability to identify the organs and the abnormalities on the scans. CONCLUSIONS: This study shows that a complete transvaginal gynecologic examination can be done in 1.07 minutes of scan time and interpreted offline in an additional 1.19 minutes. The 35 cases were scanned and interpreted with the use of 3D sonography in 79.17 minutes total compared with 91.46 minutes of 2D scan time (P = .047). The accuracy of the scan was similar for both techniques.
OBJECTIVE: The purpose of this study was to determine whether 3-dimensional (3D) sonography can provide a rapid, efficient, and accurate way to do a transvaginal gynecologic scan compared with traditional 2-dimensional (2D) sonography. METHODS: Thirty-five consecutive patients who underwent gynecologic sonography formed the study cohort. After a standard 2D transvaginal scan was done, including measurements of the endometrium and abnormalities, 4 volume acquisitions were obtained, encompassing the uterus (2 volumes) and the ovaries. These volumes were reviewed offline without any patient information. Endometrium and other measurements were performed on the volumes. The 2D and 3D results were compared by paired t tests. RESULTS: The mean time needed for the standard 2D scan was 2.6 minutes compared with 1.07 minutes for the 3D volume acquisitions. The mean time for the reconstruction, measurement, and interpretation of the volumes offline was 1.19 minutes. The mean time for the entire 3D examination (both parts) was 2.26 minutes (P = .047, comparing 2D with total 3D). There was no significant difference between the measurements of the endometrium, fibroids, and ovarian cysts when comparing 2D and reconstructed 3D images. Two-dimensional and 3D sonography differed little in their ability to identify the organs and the abnormalities on the scans. CONCLUSIONS: This study shows that a complete transvaginal gynecologic examination can be done in 1.07 minutes of scan time and interpreted offline in an additional 1.19 minutes. The 35 cases were scanned and interpreted with the use of 3D sonography in 79.17 minutes total compared with 91.46 minutes of 2D scan time (P = .047). The accuracy of the scan was similar for both techniques.