© 2004 by the American Institute of Ultrasound in Medicine
J Ultrasound Med 23:1433-1440 0278-4297
The Clinical Value of 3-Dimensional Saline Infusion Sonography in Addition to 2-Dimensional Saline Infusion Sonography in Women With Abnormal Uterine Bleeding
Work in Progress
Cornelis D. de Kroon, MD,
Leonie A. Louwé, MD,
J. Baptist Trimbos, MD, PhD and
Frank Willem Jansen, MD, PhD
Department of Gynecology, Leiden University Medical Center, Leiden, the Netherlands.
Address correspondence and reprint requests to Frank Willem Jansen, MD, PhD, Department of Gynecology, Leiden University Medical Center, K6-76, PO Box 9600, 2300 RC Leiden, the Netherlands. E-mail: f.w.jansen{at}lumc.nl.
Objective. To evaluate the clinical relevance of 3-dimensional saline infusion sonography (3D-SIS) in addition to conventional SIS in women with abnormal uterine bleeding suspected of having intrauterine abnormalities. Methods. All women suspected of having intrauterine abnormalities were eligible. Before 3D-SIS, conventional SIS was performed. The results of these techniques were compared with the "combined method reference standard" (hysteroscopy, endometrial sampling, and clinical follow-up in cases with normal SIS findings). Diagnostic characteristics (with 95% confidence intervals [CIs]) of 3D-SIS and SIS were calculated as well as their respective accuracy in evaluating the histologic nature, the intrauterine extension, and the location of intrauterine abnormalities. Moreover, the reliability ( value) and clinical relevance of 3D-SIS were assessed. Results. A total of 49 women were included, and 4 women were excluded. The positive predictive values of 3D-SIS and SIS were, respectively, 1.00 and 0.86 (95% CI, 0.720.99; P = .15), and the diagnostic accuracy values were 0.98 (95% CI, 0.941.0) and 0.91 (95% CI, 0.830.99; P = .08). Saline infusion sonography and 3D-SIS were equally accurate in evaluating the histologic nature, intrauterine extent, and location of intrauterine abnormalities (respective values: 0.85 versus 0.93; P = .88; 0.83 versus 0.83; and 0.77 versus 0.80; P = .81). The reliability of 3D-SIS was good: intraobserver and interobserver agreement ( ) were 0.78 and 0.72. Three women (6.7%) had the benefit of additional 3D-SIS: in these women, SIS wrongly led to a diagnosis of intrauterine abnormalities (P = .08). Conclusions. Three-dimensional saline infusion sonography is valid and reliable in women suspected of having intrauterine abnormalities and may indeed have relevant clinical value in addition to conventional SIS.
Key Words: intrauterine abnormalities reliability saline infusion sonography 3-dimensional saline infusion sonography 3-dimensional sonography validation Abbreviations: CI, confidence interval SIS, saline infusion sonography 3D, 3-dimensional TVS, transvaginal sonography
This article has been cited by other articles:

|
 |

|
 |
 
S. V. Ghate, M. M. Crockett, B. K. Boyd, and E. K. Paulson
Sonohysterography: Do 3D Reconstructed Images Provide Additional Value?
Am. J. Roentgenol.,
April 1, 2008;
190(4):
W227 - W233.
[Abstract]
[Full Text]
[PDF]
|
 |
|

|
 |

|
 |
 
B. R. Benacerraf, T. D. Shipp, and B. Bromley
Which Patients Benefit from a 3D Reconstructed Coronal View of the Uterus Added to Standard Routine 2D Pelvic Sonography?
Am. J. Roentgenol.,
March 1, 2008;
190(3):
626 - 629.
[Abstract]
[Full Text]
[PDF]
|
 |
|

|
 |

|
 |
 
I. Takac
Transvaginal Ultrasonography With and Without Saline Infusion in Assessment of Myometrial Invasion of Endometrial Cancer
J. Ultrasound Med.,
July 1, 2007;
26(7):
949 - 955.
[Abstract]
[Full Text]
[PDF]
|
 |
|

|
 |

|
 |
 
B. R. Benacerraf, T. D. Shipp, and B. Bromley
Improving the Efficiency of Gynecologic Sonography With 3-Dimensional Volumes: A Pilot Study
J. Ultrasound Med.,
February 1, 2006;
25(2):
165 - 171.
[Abstract]
[Full Text]
[PDF]
|
 |
|

|
 |

|
 |
 
B. R. Benacerraf, C. B. Benson, A. Z. Abuhamad, J. A. Copel, J. S. Abramowicz, G. R. DeVore, P. M. Doubilet, W. Lee, A. S. Lev-Toaff, E. Merz, et al.
Three- and 4-Dimensional Ultrasound in Obstetrics and Gynecology: Proceedings of the American Institute of Ultrasound in Medicine Consensus Conference
J. Ultrasound Med.,
December 1, 2005;
24(12):
1587 - 1597.
[Abstract]
[Full Text]
[PDF]
|
 |
|
|
|