3D-Ultraschall in der Pränatalmedizin und in der Gynäkologie

  • S. Grüssner
Conference paper

Zusammenfassung

  1. 1

    Die 3D-Sonographie bietet 3 optionale Darstellungsmöglichkeiten und erlangt dadurch in der nichtinvasiven pränatalen und gynäkologischen Diagnostik den gleichen Stellenwert wie die Computertomographie oder die MRT-Untersuchung.

     
  2. 2

    Vorteile ergeben sich aus der Obertlächendarstellung und der multiplanaren Darstellung in drei Ebenen, sodass komplexe anatomische Strukturen aus unterschiedlichen optischen Blickwinkeln tomographisch genau betrachtet werden können.

     
  3. 3

    Die 3D-Sonographie ermöglicht die mehrdimensionale Größen- und Volumenbestimmung eines fetalen Defektes, die fetale Skelettdarstellung im röntgenähnlichen Transparenzmodus und die Speicherung von Datensätzen, mit unbegrenzter offline-Analyse der Bilddateien.

     
  4. 4

    Limitationen der 3D-Sonographie sind je nach Anwendung von zeitversetzter oder zeitglei­cher (realtime) Berechnung von Bilddateien insbesondere in der pränatalen Diagnostik durch fetale Bewegungsartefakte und durch Oligohydramnie gegeben.

     
  5. 5

    Aufgrund des höheren technischen und zeitlichen Aufwandes, sowie der noch zu geringen Anzahl von randomisierten Vergleichsstudien zwischen 2D- und 3D-Sonographie ist die 3D-Sonographie derzeit noch eine komplementäre Anwendungsoption in der pränatalen und gynäkologischen Diagnostik.

     

Preview

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

Literatur

  1. 1.
    Battaglia C, Salvatori S, Giuini MR, Primavera A, Gallinelli A, Volpe A (1999) Hormonal replace-ment therapy and urinary problems as evaluated by ultrasound and color Doppler. Ultrasound Obstet Gynecol 13: 420–424PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  2. 2.
    Benoit B, Hafner T, Kurjak A, Kupesic S, Bekavac I, Bozek T (2002) Three-dimensional sonoembryo-logy. J Perinat Med 30 (1): 63–73PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  3. 3.
    Burg G, Haeffner A (2002) Dr. JPEG and Mr. BYTE Perspektiven telemedizinischer Applikationen. Dtsch Ärztebl 99 (27): A1888 - A1890Google Scholar
  4. 4.
    Campbell S (2002) 4D, or not 4D: that is the ques-tion. Ultrasound Obstet Gynecol 19: 1–4Google Scholar
  5. 5.
    Carlson DE (2000) The ultrasound evaluation of cleft lip and palate - a clear winner for 3D. Ultra-sound Obstet Gynecol 16: 299–3o1Google Scholar
  6. 6.
    Chaoui R, Kalache KD (2001) Three-dimensional power Doppler ultrasound of the fetal great ves-sels. Ultrasound Obstet Gynecol 17 (5): 455–456Google Scholar
  7. 7.
    Chaoui R, Kalache KD, Hartung J (2001) Applica-tion of three-dimensional power Doppler ultra-sound in prenatal diagnosis. Ultrasound Obstet Gynecol 17 (1): 22–29Google Scholar
  8. 8.
    Eppel W, Worda C, Frigo P, Lee A (2001) Three-vs. two-dimensional ultrasound for nuchal trans-lucency thickness measurements: comparison of feasibility and levels of agreement. Pren Diagn 21 (7): 596–6o1Google Scholar
  9. 9.
    Forsberg F, Rawool NM, Merton DA, Liu JB, Gold-berg BB (2002) Contrast enhanced vascular three-dimensional ultrasound imaging. Ultrasonics 40 (1–8): 17–122Google Scholar
  10. 10.
    Greene NH, Platt LD, Santulli TS, Krutilin S, Kar-Ian BY (2000) Usefulness of three-dimensional ultrasound in evaluation of ovarian pathology. J Ultrasound Med 19: S83Google Scholar
  11. 11.
    Guerra FA Isla, I, Aguilar RC, Fritz EG (2000) Use of free-hand three-dimensional ultrasound soft-ware in the study of fetal heart. Ultrasound Gyne-col Obstet 16 (4): 329–334CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  12. 12.
    Hafner T, Kurjak A, Funduk-Kurjak B, Bekavac I (2002) Assessment of early chorionic circulation by three-dimensional power Doppler. J Perinat Med 3o: 33–39Google Scholar
  13. 13.
    Hull AD, James G, Salerno CC, Nelson T, Pretorius DH (2001) Three-dimensional ultrasonography and assessment of the first-trimester fetus. J Ultrasound Med 20 (4): 287–293PubMedGoogle Scholar
  14. 14.
    Hull AD, Pretorius DH, Lev-Toaff A, Budorick NE, Salerno CC, Johnson MM, James G, Nelson TR (2000) Artifacts and the visualization of fetal dis-tal extremities using three-dimensional ultra-sound. Ultrasound Obstet Gynecol 16 (4): 341–344PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  15. 15.
    Kos M, Hafner T, Funduk-Kurjak B, Bozek T, Kur-jak A (2002) Limb deformities and three-dimen-sional ultrasound. J Perinat Med 30: 40–47Google Scholar
  16. 16.
    Kupegic S, Hafner T, Bjelos D (2002) Events from ovulation to implantation studied by three-dimensional ultrasound. J Perinat Med 30: 84–98CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  17. 17.
    Kupegic S, Kurjak A, Skenderovic S, Bjelos D (2002) Screening for uterine abnormalities by three-dimensional ultrasound improves perinatal outcome. J Perinat Med 30: 9–17Google Scholar
  18. 18.
    Kurjak A (2002) 3D ultrasound and perinatal medicine. J Perinat Med 30 (1): 5–7Google Scholar
  19. 19.
    Kurjak A, Hafner T, Kos M, Kupesic S, Stanojevic M (2000) Three-dimensional sonography in pre-natal diagnosis: a luxury or a necessity? J Perinat Med 28 (3): 194–209PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  20. 20.
    Kurjak A, Hafner T, Kupesic S, Kostovic L (2002) Three-dimensional power Doppler in study of em-bryonic vasculogenesis. J Perinat Med 30 (1): 18–25Google Scholar
  21. 21.
    Kurjak A, Kupesic S, Anic T, Kosuta D (woo) Three-dimensional ultrasound and power Dopp-ler improve the diagnosis of ovarian lesions. Gynecol Oncol 76: 28–32Google Scholar
  22. 22.
    Kurjak A, Kupesic S, Kos M (2002) Three-dimen-sional sonography for assessment of morphology and vascularization of the fetus and placenta. J Soc Gynecol Invest 9 (4): 186–2o2Google Scholar
  23. 23.
    Kurjak A, Vecek N, Hafner T, Bozek T, Funduk-Kurjak B, Ujevic B (2002) Prenatal diagnosis: what does four-dimensional ultrasound add? J Perinat Med 30 (1): 57–62PubMedGoogle Scholar
  24. 24.
    Less W (2001) Ultrasound imaging in three and four dimensions. Semin Ultrasound CT MR 22 (1): 85–105Google Scholar
  25. 25.
    Matijevic R, Kurjak A (2002) The assessment of placental blood vessel by three-dimensional power Doppler ultrasound. J Perinat Med 30: 2, 6–32Google Scholar
  26. 26.
    Michailidis GD, Papageorgiou P, Economides DL (2002) Assessment of fetal anatomy in the first tri-mester using two-and three-dimensional ultra-sound. Br J Radiol 75 (892): 225–219Google Scholar
  27. 27.
    Monteagudo A, Timor-Tritsch IE, Mayberry P (2000) Three-dimensional transvaginal neuroso-nography of the fetal brain: navigation in the volume scan. Ultrasound Obstet Gynecol 16: 307PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  28. 28.
    Ohno M, Kanenishi K, Kuno A, Akiyama M, Yamashiro C, Tanaka H, Shiota A, Senoh D, Hata T (2002) Three-dimensional sonographic features of nuchal edema. Gynecol Obstet Invest 53 (2): 125–128PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  29. 29.
    Pilu G, Perolo A, Falco P, Visentin A, Gabrielli S, Bovicelli L (2000) Ultrasound of the fetal central nervous system. Curr Opin Obstet Gynecol 12: 93PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  30. 30.
    Platt LD (2000) Three-dimensional ultrasound. Ultrasound Obstet Gynecol 16: 295–297PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  31. 31.
    Pooh RK, Pooh KH (2002) The assessment of fetal brain morphology and circulation by transvaginal sonography and power Doppler. J Perinat Med 30 (1): 48–56PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  32. 32.
    Ritsuko KP, Kyong HP (2002) The assessment of fetal brain morphology and circulation by trans-vaginal 3D sonography and power Doppler. J Peri-nat Med 30: 48–56CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  33. 33.
    Rotten D, Levaillant JM, Martinez H, Ducou le Pointe H,Vicaut E (2002) The fetal mandible: a 2D and 3D sonographic approach to the diagnosis of retrognathia and micrognathia. Ultrasound Obstet Gynecol (2): 122–130Google Scholar
  34. 34.
    Rotten D, Levaillant JM, Zerat L (1999) Analysis of normal breast tissue and of solid breast masses using three-dimensional ultrasound mammogra-phy. Ultrasound Obstet Gynecol 14: 114–124PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  35. 35.
    Scharf A, Geka F, Steinborn A, Frey H, Schlemmer A, Sohn C (2000) 3D realtime imaging of the fetal heart. Fetal Diagn Ther 15: 267–274Google Scholar
  36. 36.
    Schild RL, Fimmers R, Hansmann M (2000) Fetal weight estimation by three-dimensional ultra-sound. Ultrasound Obstet Gynecol 16: 445–452PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  37. 37.
    Slansky MS, Nelson T, Strachan M, Pretorius D (1999) Real-time-three-dimensional fetal echo-cardiography: initial feasibility study. J Ultra-sound Med 18: 745–752Google Scholar
  38. 38.
    Song TB,Moore Tr, Lee JI, Kim YH, Kim EK (2000) Fetal weight prediction by thigh volume measure-ment with three-dimensional ultrasonography. Obstet Gynecol 96: 157–161CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  39. 39.
    Surry KJ, Smith WL, Campbell LJ, Mills GR, Dow-ney DB, Fenster A (2002) The development and evaluation of a three-dimensional ultrasound gui-ded breast biopsy apparatus. Med Image Anal 6 (3): 302–322CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  40. 40.
    Weismann CF, Forstner R, Prokop E, Rettenbacher T (2000) Three-dimensional targeting: a new three-dimensional ultrasound technique to evalu-ate needle position during breast biopsy. Ultra-sound Obstet Gynecol 16: 359–364CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  41. 41.
    Wilson RD (2002) Prenatal evaluation for fetal surgery. Curr Opin Obstet Gynecol 14 (2): 187–193PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer-Verlag Berlin Heidelberg 2003

Authors and Affiliations

  • S. Grüssner

There are no affiliations available

Personalised recommendations