Three-dimensional hysterosonography versus hysteroscopy for the detection of intracavitary uterine abnormalities.

OBJECTIVE: To compare 3-dimentional hysterosonography (3-DHS) and diagnostic hysteroscopy for the evaluation of intrauterine lesions. METHODS: In this prospective study 124 women with suspected intrauterine abnormality on 2-D ultrasonography or on hysterosalpingography were scheduled to undergo hysteroscopy, 3-DHS, and 3-D power Doppler (3-DPD) examination. However, 3-DHS could not be performed in 3 of the women because of cervical stenosis. The sensitivity and specificity of 3-DHS and 3-DPD were compared with those of hysteroscopy. RESULTS: Of the 121 women found to have an intracavitary abnormality, 20 had polyps, 11 had myomas, 2 had Müllerian duct anomalies, and 6 had synechiae on hysteroscopy. There was agreement between hysteroscopy and 3-DHS in 19 of the polyp cases, 11 of the myoma cases, 2 of the Müllerian anomaly cases, and 4 of the synechiae cases. Examination with 3-DHS and 3-DPD reached a sensitivity of 91.9% and specificity of 98.8%, with a positive predictive value of 97.1% and a negative predictive value of 96.5%, respectively. CONCLUSIONS: Examination with 3-DHS and 3-DPD both allows for accurate assessment of intrauterine abnormalities.

Evaluation of abnormal uterine bleeding by transvaginal 3-D hysterosonography and diagnostic hysteroscopy.

AIM: To compare 3-D hysterosonography (3-DHS) and diagnostic hysteroscopy in women with abnormal uterine bleeding. MATERIALS AND METHODS: Of 248 women with abnormal uterine bleeding who were referred to our department, 3-D hysterosonography and hysteroscopy were performed in 242 women and the results were estimated. In six women 3-DHS could not performed because of cervical stenosis. Sensitivity and specificity of 3-DHS compared to those of hysteroscopy. RESULTS: From the 242 women who underwent examination, we found 30 patients with polyps, 22 with myomas, four with mullerian anomalies, ten with endometrial cancer, 12 with adhesions and 165 with a normal uterine cavity. There was agreement between the two methods in 28 cases of polyps, 22 cases of myomas, four cases of mullerian anomalies, ten cases of endometrial cancer, eight cases of adhesions and in 165 cases of normal endometrium. The sensitivity and specificity of 3D hysterosonography was 93.5% and 99.4%, respectively, with a positive prognostic value (PPV) of 98.6% and a negative prognostic value (NPV) of 97%. The sensitivity and specificity of hysteroscopy was 98.7% and 99.4%, respectively, with a PPV of 98.7% and a NPV of 99.4%. CONCLUSIONS: Three-D hysterosonography accurately assessed intrauterine pathology.

Assessment of ovarian tumors using transvaginal color Doppler ultrasonography.

In our study we used transvaginal color Doppler ultrasonography in a token of 127 women presenting with unilateral ovarian tumor. The characteristics of the tumors were analyzed, the presence of vascularization was checked and the resistance index (RI) was calculated. Consequently, based on a concrete scoring system, we attempted to discriminate these tumors as benign or malignant. It was proven that 24 of 127 ovarian tumors were malignant. Transvaginal color Doppler correctly identified 21 of the 24 malignant tumors, as well as 94 of the 103 benign tumors. In nine other cases we had false-positive results. The sensitivity and the specificity of the method was 87.5% and 91.2%, while the positive and negative predictive values were 70% and 96.9%, respectively.