Literature DB >> 23437507

Assessment of uterine cavity size and shape: a systematic review addressing relevance to intrauterine procedures and events.

Norman Goldstuck1.   

Abstract

Uterine cavity measurement began with evaluation of post-mortem and surgical specimens. It has been extended in vivo by use of mechanical instruments and visualization techniques. This is a systematic review of the range of values for the uterine cavity and the practical implications of these measurements, Following a review of multiple data bases & a QUORUM analysis. Only articles with clearly defined quantitative measurements were included. Mechanical cavity measurements with a variety of instruments gave a mean endometrial cavity length (ECL) of 33.73 mm (18-22.1) and a mean endometrial cavity width (ECW) of 25.1 mm (17.8-32.2) for nulliparae. The values for multiparae were mean ECL 38.6mm(20.61-40.3) and mean ECW 34.9 mm (23.4-53). Imaging measurements for the uterine cavity by hysterography and ultrasound were mean ECL 44.3 mm (29-64) for multiparae and ECL 37 mm for nulliparae. Mean ECW was 28.2 mm (21-33) for nulliparae and 32.1 mm (26-38) for multiparae. There were wide variations due to parity, ethnicity and gestational states. Accurate measurement of intrauterine parameters is valuable for improving and enhancing many intrauterine procedures including IUD insertion, endometrial ablation, embryo placement in IVF and management of spontaneous and therapeutic abortion.

Entities:  

Mesh:

Year:  2012        PMID: 23437507

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Afr J Reprod Health        ISSN: 1118-4841


  5 in total

1.  Three-dimensional measurement and analysis of morphological parameters of the uterus in infertile women.

Authors:  Yankun Feng; Shaojing Zhang; Ying Zhou; Guibing He; Liting Hong; Li Shi; Jianmei Wang; Ping Zhang; Lidong Zhai
Journal:  Quant Imaging Med Surg       Date:  2022-04

2.  Continuation rates of two different-sized copper intrauterine devices among nulliparous women: Interim 12-month results of a single-blind, randomised, multicentre trial.

Authors:  David Hubacher; Courtney A Schreiber; David K Turok; Jeffrey T Jensen; Mitchell D Creinin; Kavita Nanda; Katharine O'Connell White; Ila Dayananda; Stephanie B Teal; Pai-Lien Chen; Beatrice A Chen; Alisa B Goldberg; Jennifer L Kerns; Clint Dart; Anita L Nelson; Michael A Thomas; David F Archer; Jill E Brown; Paula M Castaño; Anne E Burke; Bliss Kaneshiro; Diana L Blithe
Journal:  EClinicalMedicine       Date:  2022-07-16

3.  Incarcerated and Transmigrated Intrauterine Contraceptive Devices Managed at a Tertiary Care Teaching Hospital of East Delhi: A 5-Year Retrospective Analysis.

Authors:  Richa Sharma; Amita Suneja
Journal:  J Obstet Gynaecol India       Date:  2018-07-27

4.  Use of frameless intrauterine devices and systems in young nulliparous and adolescent women: results of a multicenter study.

Authors:  Dirk Wildemeersch; Sohela Jandi; Ansgar Pett; Kilian Nolte; Thomas Hasskamp; Marc Vrijens
Journal:  Int J Womens Health       Date:  2014-08-06

5.  Role of uterine forces in intrauterine device embedment, perforation, and expulsion.

Authors:  Norman D Goldstuck; Dirk Wildemeersch
Journal:  Int J Womens Health       Date:  2014-08-07
  5 in total

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.