Possibilities of three-dimensional echography in the diagnosis of Mullerian duct anomalie
Objective. To determine the possibilities and advantages of various modes of three-dimensional echography and echohysterography (3DEG/3DEHG) in the diagnosis of Mullerian duct anomalies (MDAs).Esipova I.A., Krasnova I.A., Breusenko V.G.
Materials and methods. The authors examined 450 patients of reproductive age (from 15 to 45 years) with various malformations of the pelvic organs. The study inclusion criteria were suspected MDAs according to previous ultrasound imaging; abnormal uterine bleeding; infertility; and recurrent miscarriage. It should be noted that in 23% of the examinees, the revealed defect was unaccompanied by any clinical manifestations and was a routine ultrasound finding during screening. 3DEG/3DEHG was done on a Canon Aplio MX device using a three-dimensional transvaginal probe (6.5 MHz). Ultrasound was performed on the day of the first patient visit to a physician and again on the 5th-7th day of the menstrual cycle. To obtain informative echograms, the authors used different available three-dimensional echography modes, such as multiplanar reconstruction, Omni-view, image inversion, Glass body vascular mode, and tomographic ultrasound imaging. 3DEHG was performed according to the authors’ standard procedure using catheter balloons, sterile saline that was delivered through an automated Hamou Endomat pump (KarlStorz, Germany).
Results. The results of elastography were compared with those of MRI, hysteroscopy, laparoscopy, and laparotomy in 70, 92, 23, and 8.5% of cases, respectively. Based on the studies mentioned above, the authors identified an arcuate uterus (Class U0) in 60 patients; a T-shaped uterus and accessory and cavitated uterine masses (ACUM) (Class U1) in 4 and 2 patients, respectively; incomplete and complete intrauterine septa (Class U2a/b) in 78 and 85 examinees, respectively; a bicornuate uterus (Class U3a) in 92; dimetria (Class U3b) in 91, a septate uterus (Class U3c) in 7; and a unicornuate uterus (Class U4a/b) in 31. The construction and interpretation of a three-dimensional echogram of the defect are not routine and require a specialist having sufficient qualifications, must be performed according to the regulations and be analyzed taking into account the tasks set out below. The parameters of the uterus and parametrial area, such as the shape of the uterine corpus and its size, external myometrial contour; uterine cavity shape and volume; additional anatomical structures as two reflections from the endometrium or/and endocervix, as well as additional masses in the parametrial projection, which are connected to the corpus uteri, should be consistently assessed. The authors developed clear echographic patterns of each nosological entity, which made it possible not only to diagnose the presence of a malformation, but also to classify it, as well as to obtain additional unique defect characteristics that are relevant to determine further management tactics.
Conclusion. Thus, three-dimensional echography proposes a qualitatively new method for ultrasound diagnosis of Müllerian duct anomalies, which is similar to MRI and makes it possible to get an echogram as a virtual display of real anatomy. A combination of various modes will be able to yield additional information on vascular architectonics, to predict possible pregnancy complications, to form clear indications for defect correction, and to navigate during intrauterine surgery. 3DEHG is an additional highly specific method used for differential diagnosis or in case of the difficult-to-interpret altered anatomy associated with other endometrial and myometrial diseases.
Keywords
three-dimensional echography
echohysterography
Mullerian duct anomalies
echographic patterns
hysteroresection of the septum
accessory and cavitated uterine masses (ACUM)
References
- Saravelos S.H., Cocksedge K.A., Li T. Prevalence and diagnosis of congenital uterine anomalies in women with reproductive failure: a critical appraisal. Hum. Reprod. Update. 2008; 14(5): 415-29. https://dx.doi.org/10.1093/humupd/dmn018.
- Ludwin A., Pfeifer S.M. Reproductive surgery for Müllerian anomalies: a review of progress in the last decade. Fertil. Steril. 2019; 112(3): 408-16. https://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.fertnstert.2019.07.005.
- Chan Y.Y., Jayaprakasan K., Zamora J., Thornton J.G., Raine-Fenning N., Coomarasamy A. The prevalence of congenital uterine anomalies in unselected and high-risk populations: a systematic review. Hum. Reprod. Update. 2011; 17(6): 761-71. https://dx.doi.org/10.1093/humupd/dmr028.
- Olpin J.D., Moeni A., Willmore R.J., Heilbrun M.E. MR Imaging of Müllerian fusion anomalies. Magn. Reson. Imaging Clin. N. Am. 2017; 25(3): 563-75.
- Grimbizis G.F., Spiezio Sardo A.D., Saravelos S.H., Gordts S., Exacoustos C., Van Schoubroeck D. et al. The Thessaloniki ESHRE/ESGE consensus on diagnosis of female genital anomalies. Gynecol. Surg. 2016; 13: 1-16. https://dx.doi.org/10.1007/s10397-015-0909-1.
- Grimbizis G.F., Gordts S., Sardo A., Brucker S., Angelis C., Gergolet M. et al. The ESHRE/ESGE consensus on the classification of female genital tract congenital anomalies. Hum. Reprod. 2013; 28(8): 2032-44. https://dx.doi.org/10.1093/humrep/det098.
- Ludwin A., Ludwin I., Coelho Neto M.A., Nastri C.O., Bhagavath B., Lindheim S.R. et al. Septate uterus according to ESHRE/ESGE, ASRM and CUME definitions: association with infertility and miscarriage, cost and warnings for women and healthcare systems. Ultrasound Obstet. Gynecol. 2019; 54(6): 800-14. https://dx.doi.org/10.1002/uog.20291.
- Troiano R.N., McCarthy S.M. Müllerian duct anomalies: imaging and clinical issues. Radiology. 2004; 233(1): 19-34. https://dx.doi.org/10.1148/radiol.2331020777.
Received 29.05.2020
Accepted 07.10.2020
About the Authors
Irina A. Esipova, PhD; Associate professor of the Department of Obstetrics and Gynecology, Pediatric Faculty; N.I. Pirogov Russian National Research Medical University.Tel.: +7(916)345-17-88. E-mail: esipova.ira@inbox.ru. ORCID: 0000-0002-2130-5431.
119415, Russia, Moscow, Lobachevsky str., 42.
Irina A. Krasnova, Doctor of medical sciences, professor; Professor of the Department of Obstetrics and Gynecology, Pediatric Faculty, N.I. Pirogov Russian National Research Medical University. Tel.: +7(916)687-46-73. E-mail: krasnovairina@mail.ru. ORCID: 0000-0002-6765-4127.
119415, Russia, Moscow, Lobachevsky str., 42.
Valentina G. Breusenko, Doctor of medical sciences, professor; Professor of the Department of Obstetrics and Gynecology, Pediatric Faculty, N.I. Pirogov Russian National Research Medical University. Tel.: +7(985)725-00-32. E-mail: breusenkovg@yandex.ru. ORCID: 0000-0001-6999-4654.
119415, Russia, Moscow, Lobachevsky str., 42.
For citation: Esipova I.A., Krasnova I.A., Breusenko V.G. Possibilities of three-dimensional echography in the diagnosis of Mullerian duct anomalies.
Akusherstvo i Ginekologiya/ Obstetrics and gynecology. 2020; 10: 125-134 (in Russian)
https://dx.doi.org/10.18565/aig.2020.10.125-134
Similar Articles
