American Journal of Roentgenology, Vol 165, 1233-1237, Copyright © 1995 by American Roentgen Ray Society

ARTICLES

Evaluation of normal and abnormal lips in fetuses: comparison between three- and two-dimensional sonography

DH Pretorius, M House, TR Nelson and KA Hollenbach
Department of Radiology--0610, University of California, San Diego, La Jolla 92093, USA.

OBJECTIVE. The purpose of this study was to determine if three- dimensional (3D) sonography could improve prenatal evaluation of fetal lips in comparison with conventional two-dimensional (2D) sonography. MATERIALS AND METHODS. Sixty-one high-risk pregnant women and 10 low- risk pregnant women were examined with conventional 2D sonography followed by 3D sonography with a volume transducer. The ability to visualize cleft lips and normal lips was compared between the two techniques. RESULTS. Of the 71 fetuses studied, faces were seen in 68 and not seen in three by either 2D or 3D sonography. Abnormal lips were seen in five fetuses on both 2D and 3D sonograms. Of the remaining fetuses, 3D sonography was able to confirm the presence of a normal lip in 92% (58/63) compared with 76% (48/63) with 2D sonography. In the subgroup of fetuses less than 24 weeks' estimated gestational age, 3D sonography confirmed a normal lip in 93% (38/41) of fetuses as compared with 68% (28/41) for 2D sonography. There was no difference between 3D and 2D in the subgroup of fetuses older than 24 weeks. One false- positive finding of cleft lip was observed at 36 weeks' gestational age with the rendered surface display on 3D sonography, whereas the 3D planar views of the same volume showed the lips to be normal. CONCLUSION. 3D sonography was able to confirm the presence of normal lips more frequently than did 2D sonography in fetuses less than 24 weeks' gestational age. Abnormal lips were seen on both 2D and 3D sonograms; however, 3D images of cleft lip were easier to understand for both the family and clinical colleagues.
CiteULike    Complore    Connotea    Del.icio.us    Digg    Reddit    Technorati    What's this?

This article has been cited by other articles:

				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]

				H.-X. Xu, M.-D. Lu, Y.-Q. Zhou, Q.-P. Zhang, X.-Y. Yin, X.-Y. Xie, and L. Liu Three-dimensional Gray Scale Volume Rendering of the Liver: Preliminary Clinical Experience J. Ultrasound Med., September 1, 2002; 21(9): 961 - 970. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]

				A. Kurjak, S. Kupesic, and M. Kos Three-Dimensional Sonography for Assessment of Morphology and Vascularization of the Fetus and Placenta Reproductive Sciences, July 1, 2002; 9(4): 186 - 202. [Abstract] [PDF]

				J. E. Bailey, R. O. Bude, and T. Tuthill US Artifacts: Effects on Out-of-Plane US Images Reconstructed from Three-dimensional Data Sets Radiology, February 1, 2001; 218(2): 592 - 597. [Abstract] [Full Text]

				M. Matsumoto, T. Yanagihara, and T. Hata Three-dimensional qualitative sonographic evaluation of fetal soft tissue Hum. Reprod., November 1, 2000; 15(11): 2438 - 2442. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]

				D. D. Johnson, D. H. Pretorius, N. E. Budorick, M. C. Jones, K. V. Lou, G. M. James, and T. R. Nelson Fetal Lip and Primary Palate: Three-dimensional versus Two-dimensional US Radiology, October 1, 2000; 217(1): 236 - 239. [Abstract] [Full Text]

				T. Muller, M. Rehn, U. Pohls, P. Kristen, J. Dietl, and T. Hata Three-dimensional ultrasonographic evaluation of ovarian tumours Hum. Reprod., December 1, 1999; 14(12): 3150 - 3151. [Full Text] [PDF]