References:
  1. Francisco Raga,M.D.,Fernando Bonilla-Musoles, M.D.,Javier Blanes,M.D.,et al. Congenital Mullerian anomalies:diagnostic accuracy of three-dimensional ultrasound. FERTIL STERIAL 1996,65(3):523-528.
  2. Meng-Hsing Wu, MD, Chao-Chin Hsu,MD, PhD, Ko-En Huang,MD.Detection of Congenital Mullerian Duct Anomalies Using Three-Dimensional Ultrasound. J Clin Ultrasound, 1997,25(9):487-492.
  3. Min Jeong Kim, Youngjin Lee, Chulmin Lee, et al. Accuracy of three dimensional ultrasound and treatment outcomes of intrauterine adhesion in infertile women.Taiwan J Obstet Gyne,2015, 54 :737-741.
  4. Fedele L, Bianchi S, Dorta M,et al. Intrauterine adhesion: detection with transvaginal US. Radiology 1996;199:757–9.
  5. Anna Kougioumtsidou, Themistoklis Mikos, Grigoris F. Grimbizis, et al. Three-dimensional ultrasound in the diagnosis and the classification of congenital uterine anomalies using the ESHRE/ESGE classification: a diagnostic accuracy study. Arch Gynecol Obstet,https://doi.org/10.1007/s00404-019-05050-x
  6. N. Makris, K.Kalmantis, N. Skartados,et al. Three-dimensional hysterosonography versus hysteroscopy for the detection of intracavitary uterine abnormalities. Int J Gynec Obstet, 2007,97:6-9.
  7. Piotr Szkodziak, Slawomir Wozniak, Piotr Czuczwar, et al. Usefulness of three dimensional transvaginal ultrasonography and hysterosalpingography in diagnosing uterine anomalies. Ginekol Pol, 2014,85:354-359.
  8. Groszmann Y, Benacerraf B. Complete eGYNECOLOGY AND OBSTETRICSGYNECOLOGY valuation of anatomy and morphology of the infertile patient in a single visit; the modern infertility pelvic ultrasound examination. Fertil Steril. 2016;105:1381–1393.
  9. Detti L. Ultrasound assessment of uterine cavity remodeling after surgical correction of subseptations. Am J Obstet Gynecol. 2014;210:262.e1–262.e6.
  10. Detti L, Norwick H, Levi D’Ancona R, et al. Relevance of uterine subseptations: what length
should warrant hysteroscopic resection? J Ultrasound Med. 2016. In press.
  1. C. Bermejo, MD, PhD, P. Martı´nez-Ten, MD, PhD, L. Ruı´z-Lo´pez, BA, M. Este´vez, MD and M. M. Gil, MD, PhD.Classification of Uterine Anomalies by 3-Dimensional Ultrasonography Using ESHRE/ESGE Criteria: Interobserver Variability. Reprod Sci, sagepub.com/journalsPermissions.nav DOI: 10.1177/1933719117725825 journals.sagepub.com/home/rsx
  2. Zafarani F, Ahmadi F. Evaluation of intrauterine structural pathology by three-dimensional sonohysterography using an extended imaging method. Int J Fertil Steril 2013; 7: 1-6.
  3. Knopman J, Copperman AB. Value of 3D ultrasound in the management of suspected Asherman’s syndrome. J Reprod Med 2007; 52: 1016-1022 [PMID: 18161399]
  4. FANG Ting-feng,SU Zheng,XIANG Ting-ting,DING Miao,DING Hong, WANG Liang-an, XIE Mei-qing, WANG Wen-jun. A New Method for Assessing the Intrauterine Adhesion by three-dimensional Endometrial Area Imaging.Journal of Sun Yat-Sen Univercity(Medical Sciences), 2019,40(4):615-621.
  5. Detti L. Ultrasound assessment of uterine cavity remodeling after surgical correction of subseptations. Am J Obstet Gynecol 2014;210:262.e1-6.
  6. A. Ludwin , M. A. Coelho Neto, I. Ludwin, C.O. Nastri , W. Costa, M. Acién , J.L. Alcazar, B. Benacerraf, G. Condous, A. DeCherney, R-L. De Wilde, M.P. Diamond, M.H. Emanuel, S. Guerriero, W. Hurd, D. Levine, S. Lindheim, A. Pellicer, F. Petraglia, E. Saridogan, W.P. Martins. Congenital Uterine Malformation by Experts (CUME): T-shaped uterus. Doi:10.1002/uog.20845.
  7. Janina Kaislasuo, Oskari Heikinheimo,, Pekka La hteenma ki ,and Satu Suhonen.Menstrual characteristics and ultrasonographic uterine cavity measurements predict bleeding and pain in nulligravid women using intrauterine contraception.Hum Reprod, 2015,30(7):1580–1588.
  8. Kurz KH. Cavimeter uterine measurements and IUD clinical correlation. In: Zatuchni GI, Goldsmith A, Sciarra JJ, editors. Intrauterine Contraception: Advances and Future Prospects. Philadelphia: Harper and Row; 1984:142–162.
  9. Wang Jao-quang, Wang Quang-fwi, Chang Fo-yuan. Studies On The Transverse Diameter Of The Uterine Cavity Of the Normal Fertile Women In Liao-Ning District Of China. Chinese Journal of Reproduction and Contraception. 1981,1(3):10-15.
  10. Norman D Goldstuck. Dimensional analysis of the endometrial cavity: how many dimensions should the ideal intrauterine device or system have?Int J Womens Health,2018:10 165–168.
  11. Janina Kaislasuo, MD, Oskari Heikinheimo, MD, PhD, Pekka Lähteenmäki, MD, PhD, and Satu Suhonen, MD, PhD.Predicting Painful or Difficult Intrauterine Device Insertion in Nulligravid Women. Obstet Gynecol 2014;124:345–53.
  12. Yu D, Li TC, Xia E, Huang X, Liu Y, Peng X. Factors affecting reproductive outcome of hysteroscopic adhesiolysis for Asherman’s syndrome. Fertil Steril 2008;89:715–22.
  13. Jaime Knopman, M.D. and Alan B. Copperman, M.D. Value of 3D Ultrasound in the management of suspected Asherman’s syndrome. J Reprod Med.2007,52:1016-1022.
  14. Gadelha Da Costa A, Filho FM, Ferreira AC, Spara P, Mauad FM. Uterine volume in adolescents. Ultrasound Med Biol 2004;30:7–10.
  15. Canteiro R, Bahamondes MV, dos Santos Fernandes A, Espejo-Arce X, Marchi NM, Bahamondes L. Length of the endometrial cavity as measured by uterine sounding and ultrasonography in women of different parities. Contraception 2010;81:515–519.
Figure 1: Parameters of 3D measurement: (A) Uterine cavity width; (B) Lateral indentation angles right and left; (C) Cornual angles right and left; (D) Uterine cavity length; (E) Uterine cavity area; (F) Internal os width; (G) Lateral indentation depths right and left; (H) Identification of anatomical internal os in coronal plane utilizing the function of Fixed ROI in 2D sagittal view.