INTRODUCTION: To compare the diagnostic values of three-dimensional sonohysterography (3DSH), transvaginal ultrasound (TVUS), and 2-dimensional sonohysterography (2DSH) in the work-up of abnormal uterine bleeding (AUB), in particular the ability of each method to identify intracavitary lesions arising from the endometrium or uterine wall. MATERIALS AND METHODS: 24 patients referred for AUB underwent TVUS followed by 2-D and 3-D HS in the same session. Three-dimensional data were acquired with a free-hand technique during maximal distention of the uterus. Within 10 days of the sonographic session, each patient underwent hysteroscopy, which was considered the reference standard. For each of the 3 imaging methods, we calculated sensitivity, specificity, positive predictive value (PPV), negative predictive value (NPV), and accuracy. RESULTS: Hysteroscopy demonstrated the presence of an intrauterine lesion in 21/24 patients (87.5%). In 3/24 patients hysteroscopy was negative. For TVUS, 2DSH, and 3DSH, sensitivity was 76% (16/21), 90% (19/21), 100% (21/21), respectively; specificity was 100% (3/3), 100% (19/19), 100% (21/21); PPV was 100%, 100%, 100%; NPV was 37%, 60%, 100%; accuracy was 76%, 90%, 100%. CONCLUSIONS: 3DSH is more sensitive that 2DSH or TVUS in the detection of intrauterine lesions. If these preliminary results are confirmed in larger studies, 3DSH could be proposed as a valuable alternative to diagnostic hysteroscopy.
INTRODUCTION: To compare the diagnostic values of three-dimensional sonohysterography (3DSH), transvaginal ultrasound (TVUS), and 2-dimensional sonohysterography (2DSH) in the work-up of abnormal uterine bleeding (AUB), in particular the ability of each method to identify intracavitary lesions arising from the endometrium or uterine wall. MATERIALS AND METHODS: 24 patients referred for AUB underwent TVUS followed by 2-D and 3-D HS in the same session. Three-dimensional data were acquired with a free-hand technique during maximal distention of the uterus. Within 10 days of the sonographic session, each patient underwent hysteroscopy, which was considered the reference standard. For each of the 3 imaging methods, we calculated sensitivity, specificity, positive predictive value (PPV), negative predictive value (NPV), and accuracy. RESULTS: Hysteroscopy demonstrated the presence of an intrauterine lesion in 21/24 patients (87.5%). In 3/24 patients hysteroscopy was negative. For TVUS, 2DSH, and 3DSH, sensitivity was 76% (16/21), 90% (19/21), 100% (21/21), respectively; specificity was 100% (3/3), 100% (19/19), 100% (21/21); PPV was 100%, 100%, 100%; NPV was 37%, 60%, 100%; accuracy was 76%, 90%, 100%. CONCLUSIONS: 3DSH is more sensitive that 2DSH or TVUS in the detection of intrauterine lesions. If these preliminary results are confirmed in larger studies, 3DSH could be proposed as a valuable alternative to diagnostic hysteroscopy.
Authors: Lotte L Nieuwenhuis; Frederik Jr Hermans; A J Marjolein Bij de Vaate; Mariska Mg Leeflang; Hans Am Brölmann; Wouter Jk Hehenkamp; Ben Willem J Mol; T Justin Clark; Judith Af Huirne Journal: Cochrane Database Syst Rev Date: 2017-05-05
Authors: Ahmed S A Sabry; Shimaa A Fadl; Wojciech Szmigielski; Amal Alobaidely; Sanaa S H Ahmed; Hanan Sherif; Reda R H Yousef; Ahmed Mahfouz Journal: Pol J Radiol Date: 2018-11-30