Skip to main content
SpringerLink
Log in

3D Ultrasound

  • Chapter
  • First Online:
Advanced Thyroid and Parathyroid Ultrasound

  • 2010 Accesses

Abstract

Conventional two-dimensional (2D) ultrasound is the most widely used imaging modality to evaluate thyroid disorders. Limitations related to the 2D display, operator dependency, and interobserver variability have led to the development of three-dimensional (3D) ultrasound imaging. Images displayed in three dimensions are either reformatted from 2D images produced by a conventional ultrasound transducer with a 1D array or generated directly in real time by an ultrasound transducer with a 2D array. Advantages of 3D ultrasound compared to 2D ultrasound include that all data is stored continuously rather than images only saved if selected by the ultrasonographer, data acquisition is faster, data can be manipulated to display images in any viewing plane, and volume calculations are not operator dependent. Disadvantages of 3D ultrasound compared to 2D ultrasound are that the images may be subject to motion and reconstruction artifacts, and the image quality may be inferior because of the lower resolution of the extracted planes from volume data. Applications of 3D ultrasound in the evaluation of thyroid disease can broadly be divided into three categories: risk assessment of thyroid nodules for malignancy, preoperative assessment of extrathyroidal extension of thyroid cancers, and thyroid volume calculations for radioactive iodine administration.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this chapter

Log in via an institution
eBook
USD 16.99
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Available as EPUB and PDF
  • Read on any device
  • Instant download
  • Own it forever
Softcover Book
USD 119.99
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Compact, lightweight edition
  • Dispatched in 3 to 5 business days
  • Free shipping worldwide - see info
Hardcover Book
USD 169.99
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Durable hardcover edition
  • Dispatched in 3 to 5 business days
  • Free shipping worldwide - see info

Tax calculation will be finalised at checkout

Purchases are for personal use only

Institutional subscriptions

References

  1. Haugen BR, Alexander EK, Bible KC, Doherty GM, Mandel SJ, Nikiforov YE, et al. 2015 American Thyroid Association Management Guidelines for adult patients with thyroid nodules and differentiated thyroid cancer: the American Thyroid Association guidelines task force on thyroid nodules and differentiated thyroid cancer. Thyroid. 2016;26(1):1–133.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  2. Kuna SK, Bracic I, Tesic V, Kuna K, Herceg GH, Dodig D. Ultrasonographic differentiation of benign from malignant neck lymphadenopathy in thyroid cancer. J Ultrasound Med. 2006;25(12):1531–7. quiz 8-40.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  3. Rosario PW, de Faria S, Bicalho L, Alves MF, Borges MA, Purisch S, et al. Ultrasonographic differentiation between metastatic and benign lymph nodes in patients with papillary thyroid carcinoma. J Ultrasound Med. 2005;24(10):1385–9.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  4. Leboulleux S, Girard E, Rose M, Travagli JP, Sabbah N, Caillou B, et al. Ultrasound criteria of malignancy for cervical lymph nodes in patients followed up for differentiated thyroid cancer. J Clin Endocrinol Metab. 2007;92(9):3590–4.

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  5. Ivanac G, Brkljacic B, Ivanac K, Huzjan R, Skreb F, Cikara I. Vascularisation of benign and malignant thyroid nodules: CD US evaluation. Ultraschall Med. 2007;28(5):502–6.

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  6. Spiezia S, Farina R, Cerbone G, Assanti AP, Iovino V, Siciliani M, et al. Analysis of color Doppler signal intensity variation after levovist injection: a new approach to the diagnosis of thyroid nodules. J Ultrasound Med. 2001;20(3):223–31. quiz 33.

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  7. Zhang B, Jiang YX, Liu JB, Yang M, Dai Q, Zhu QL, et al. Utility of contrast-enhanced ultrasound for evaluation of thyroid nodules. Thyroid. 2010;20(1):51–7.

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  8. Miyabe R. Three-dimensional ultrasonography before minimally invasive focused parathyroidectomy: the importance of coronal images. Surg Today. 2009;39(2):98–103.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  9. Pretorius DH, Borok NN, Coffler MS, Nelson TR. Three-dimensional ultrasound in obstetrics and gynecology. Radiol Clin North Am. 2001;39(3):499–521.

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  10. Lee MC, Gonzalez SJ, Lin H, Zhao X, Kiluk JV, Laronga C, et al. Prospective trial of breast MRI versus 2D and 3D ultrasound for evaluation of response to neoadjuvant chemotherapy. Ann Surg Oncol. 2015;22(9):2888–94.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  11. Hrinivich WT, Hoover DA, Surry K, Edirisinghe C, Montreuil J, D'Souza D, et al. Three-dimensional transrectal ultrasound guided high-dose-rate prostate brachytherapy: a comparison of needle segmentation accuracy with two-dimensional image guidance. Brachytherapy. 2016;15(2):231–9.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  12. Riccabona M, Nelson TR, Pretorius DH, Davidson TE. In vivo three-dimensional sonographic measurement of organ volume: validation in the urinary bladder. J Ultrasound Med. 1996;15(9):627–32.

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  13. Nosir YF, Fioretti PM, Vletter WB, Boersma E, Salustri A, Postma JT, et al. Accurate measurement of left ventricular ejection fraction by three-dimensional echocardiography. A comparison with radionuclide angiography. Circulation. 1996;94(3):460–6.

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  14. Fenster A, Downey DB, Cardinal HN. Three-dimensional ultrasound imaging. Phys Med Biol. 2001;46(5):R67–99.

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  15. Downey DB, Fenster A, Williams JC. Clinical utility of three-dimensional US. Radiographics. 2000;20(2):559–71.

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  16. Gweon HM, Son EJ, Youk JH, Kim JA, Park CS. Preoperative assessment of extrathyroidal extension of papillary thyroid carcinoma: comparison of 2- and 3-dimensional sonography. J Ultrasound Med. 2014;33(5):819–25.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  17. Cibas ES, Ali SZ. The Bethesda System for reporting thyroid cytopathology. Am J Clin Pathol. 2009;132(5):658–65.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  18. Baloch ZW, Fleisher S, LiVolsi VA, Gupta PK. Diagnosis of “follicular neoplasm”: a gray zone in thyroid fine-needle aspiration cytology. Diagn Cytopathol. 2002;26(1):41–4.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  19. Slapa RZ, Jakubowski WS, Slowinska-Srzednicka J, Szopinski KT. Advantages and disadvantages of 3D ultrasound of thyroid nodules including thin slice volume rendering. Thyroid Res. 2011;4(1):1.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  20. Li WB, Zhang B, Zhu QL, Jiang YX, Sun J, Yang M, et al. Comparison between thin-slice 3-D volumetric ultrasound and conventional ultrasound in the differentiation of benign and malignant thyroid lesions. Ultrasound Med Biol. 2015;41(12):3096–101.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  21. Molinari F, Mantovani A, Deandrea M, Limone P, Garberoglio R, Suri JS. Characterization of single thyroid nodules by contrast-enhanced 3-D ultrasound. Ultrasound Med Biol. 2010;36(10):1616–25.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  22. Haigh PI, Urbach DR, Rotstein LE. AMES prognostic index and extent of thyroidectomy for well-differentiated thyroid cancer in the United States. Surgery. 2004;136(3):609–16.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  23. Bilimoria KY, Bentrem DJ, Ko CY, Stewart AK, Winchester DP, Talamonti MS, et al. Extent of surgery affects survival for papillary thyroid cancer. Ann Surg. 2007;246(3):375–81. discussion 81-4.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  24. Haigh PI, Urbach DR, Rotstein LE. Extent of thyroidectomy is not a major determinant of survival in low- or high-risk papillary thyroid cancer. Ann Surg Oncol. 2005;12(1):81–9.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  25. Wada N, Nakayama H, Suganuma N, Masudo Y, Rino Y, Masuda M, et al. Prognostic value of the sixth edition AJCC/UICC TNM classification for differentiated thyroid carcinoma with extrathyroid extension. J Clin Endocrinol Metab. 2007;92(1):215–8.

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  26. Kwak JY, Kim EK, Youk JH, Kim MJ, Son EJ, Choi SH, et al. Extrathyroid extension of well-differentiated papillary thyroid microcarcinoma on US. Thyroid. 2008;18(6):609–14.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  27. van Isselt JW, de Klerk JM, van Rijk PP, van Gils AP, Polman LJ, Kamphuis C, et al. Comparison of methods for thyroid volume estimation in patients with Graves’ disease. Eur J Nucl Med Mol Imaging. 2003;30(4):525–31.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  28. Malago R, D'Onofrio M, Ferdeghini M, Mantovani W, Colato C, Brazzarola P, et al. Thyroid volumetric quantification: comparative evaluation between conventional and volumetric ultrasonography. J Ultrasound Med. 2008;27(12):1727–33.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  29. Freesmeyer M, Wiegand S, Schierz JH, Winkens T, Licht K. Multimodal evaluation of 2-D and 3-D ultrasound, computed tomography and magnetic resonance imaging in measurements of the thyroid volume using universally applicable cross-sectional imaging software: a phantom study. Ultrasound Med Biol. 2014;40(7):1453–62.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  30. Lyshchik A, Drozd V, Schloegl S, Reiners C. Three-dimensional ultrasonography for volume measurement of thyroid nodules in children. J Ultrasound Med. 2004;23(2):247–54.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  31. Schlogl S, Andermann P, Luster M, Reiners C, Lassmann M. A novel thyroid phantom for ultrasound volumetry: determination of intraobserver and interobserver variability. Thyroid. 2006;16(1):41–6.

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

Download references

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. Section of Endocrine Surgery, Department of Surgery, Northwestern University Feinberg School of Medicine, 676 N. St. Clair Street, Suite 650, Chicago, IL, 60611, USA

    Dina Elaraj M.D., F.A.C.S.

Authors
  1. Dina Elaraj M.D., F.A.C.S.
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Dina Elaraj M.D., F.A.C.S. .

Editor information

Editors and Affiliations

  1. Department of Surgery and the Endocrinology & Metabolism Institute, University of Arizona College of Medicine - Phoenix, Banner - University Medical Center Phoenix, Phoenix, Arizona, USA

    Mira Milas

  2. Department of Endocrinology, Diabetes and Metabolism, Perelman School of Medicine, University of Pennsylvania, Philadelphia, Pennsylvania, USA

    Susan J. Mandel

  3. Department of Radiology, The Perelman School of Medicine at the University of Pennsylvania, Philadelphia, Pennsylvania, USA

    Jill E. Langer

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

Copyright information

© 2017 Springer International Publishing Switzerland

About this chapter

Cite this chapter

Elaraj, D. (2017). 3D Ultrasound. In: Milas, M., Mandel, S.J., Langer, J.E. (eds) Advanced Thyroid and Parathyroid Ultrasound. Springer, Cham. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-319-44100-9_7

Download citation

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-319-44100-9_7

  • Published:

  • Publisher Name: Springer, Cham

  • Print ISBN: 978-3-319-44098-9

  • Online ISBN: 978-3-319-44100-9

  • eBook Packages: MedicineMedicine (R0)

Publish with us

Policies and ethics

Search

Navigation