| HOME | HELP | FEEDBACK | SUBSCRIPTIONS | ARCHIVE | SEARCH | TABLE OF CONTENTS |
|
|
|
|||||||
|
|||||||||
Obstetric Imaging |
1 From the Departments of Biomedical Engineering (K.B.) and Obstetrics and Gynecology (S.K., Y.T.), Graduate School of Medicine, University of Tokyo, 7-3-1 Hongo, Bunkyo-ku, Tokyo 113-0033, Japan; and the Department of Obstetrics and Gynecology, Aiiku Hospital, Tokyo, Japan (T.O.). Received August 28, 1997; revision requested October 17; final revision received July 24, 1998; accepted October 14. Address reprint requests to K.B.
PURPOSE: To assess the usefulness of real-time–processible three-dimensional (3D) ultrasonography (US) in the evaluation of fetal abnormalities.
MATERIALS AND METHODS: The apparatus comprised a conventional US scanner with a specially designed unit for real-time–processible 3D US and a transabdominal 3D probe. A 3D US examination was performed in 19 women with abnormalities of the fetus (13–35 weeks gestation) that had been detected at two-dimensional (2D) US.
RESULTS: Thirty-six abnormalities were detected with conventional 2D US, real-time–processible 3D US, or both in 19 fetuses with abnormalities. Seventeen (47%) of the 36 abnormalities were demonstrated and confirmed clearly with real-time–processible 3D US, and nine of these had been seen with 2D US. Eighteen intrafetal abnormalities had been demonstrated clearly with 2D US, but 14 of these could not be demonstrated with real-time–processible 3D US.
CONCLUSION: Real-time–processible 3D US is useful for evaluating fetal abnormalities as a supplement to 2D US, particularly for abnormalities of the face, ears, fingers, and anatomic axis, but real-time–processible 3D US is unlikely to be helpful for detecting intrafetal abnormalities except for skeletal abnormalities and some pathologic changes with fluid accumulation.
Index terms: Fetus, abnormalities, 856.87 • Fetus, US, 856.87 • Ultrasound (US), three-dimensional, 856.12989, 856.87
This article has been cited by other articles:
|
|
 |
|
  D. H. Pretorius, S. Gattu, E.-K. Ji, K. Hollenbach, R. Newton, A. Hull, S. Carmona, D. D'Agostini, and T. R. Nelson Preexamination and postexamination assessment of parental-fetal bonding in patients undergoing 3-/4-dimensional obstetric ultrasonography. J. Ultrasound Med., November 1, 2006; 25(11): 1411 - 1421. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]
|
|
|
|
|
|
L. F. Goncalves, J. K. Nien, J. Espinoza, J. P. Kusanovic, W. Lee, B. Swope, E. Soto, M. C. Treadwell, and R. Romero What Does 2-Dimensional Imaging Add to 3- and 4-Dimensional Obstetric Ultrasonography? J. Ultrasound Med., June 1, 2006; 25(6): 691 - 699. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]
|
|
|
|
|
|
L. F. Goncalves, W. Lee, J. Espinoza, and R. Romero Three- and 4-Dimensional Ultrasound in Obstetric Practice: Does It Help? J. Ultrasound Med., December 1, 2005; 24(12): 1599 - 1624. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]
|
|
|
|
 |
|
 Y. Suematsu, S. Takamoto, Y. Kaneko, T. Ohtsuka, H. Takayama, Y. Kotsuka, and A. Murakami Beating Atrial Septal Defect Closure Monitored by Epicardial Real-Time Three-Dimensional Echocardiography Without Cardiopulmonary Bypass Circulation, February 11, 2003; 107(5): 785 - 790. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]
|
|
|
|
|
|
H.-X. Xu, X.-Y. Yin, M.-D. Lu, L. Liu, D.-C. Yue, and G.-J. Liu Comparison of Three- and Two-dimensional Sonography in Diagnosis of Gallbladder Diseases: Preliminary Experience J. Ultrasound Med., February 1, 2003; 22(2): 181 - 191. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]
|
|
|
|
 |
|
 R. A. Kubik-Huch, S. Wildermuth, L. Cettuzzi, A. Rake, B. Seifert, R. Chaoui, and B. Marincek Fetus and Uteroplacental Unit: Fast MR Imaging with Three-dimensional Reconstruction and Volumetry—Feasibility Study Radiology, May 1, 2001; 219(2): 567 - 573. [Abstract] [Full Text]
|
|
| HOME | HELP | FEEDBACK | SUBSCRIPTIONS | ARCHIVE | SEARCH | TABLE OF CONTENTS |
| RADIOLOGY | RADIOGRAPHICS | RSNA JOURNALS ONLINE |
