Skip to main content
SpringerLink
Log in

The place of four-dimensional ultrasound in evaluating fetal anomalies

  • Original Article
  • Published:
Irish Journal of Medical Science (1971 -) Aims and scope Submit manuscript

Abstract

Objective

To analyze the capability of four-dimensional surface rendering mode ultrasound (4D SRM USG) in the detection of fetal abnormalities, and also compare it with 2D USG.

Materials and methods

A total of 1,379 pregnant women were enrolled in the study, and they all underwent 2D USG screening. In the same session, they were all subsequently screened using 4D USG. The findings of both methods were compared.

Results

A total of 194 fetal anomalies were detected in 176 of 1,379 pregnant women by 2D USG. When all cases, including superficial and non-superficial anomalies, were evaluated together, we found that 2D USG was significantly better than 4D SRM USG in detecting anomalies (p < 0.001). However, 4D SRM USG was superior to 2D USG in terms of image quality, clarity, the distinction between the surrounding structures, and intelligibility among the cases with a superficial anomaly (p < 0.005).

Conclusion

4D USG is superior to 2D USG in detecting malformations related to fetus face, spine, extremities, abdominal wall, and the body surface. However, 4D SRM USG detected only approximately half of the cases with anomalies, and showed a better quality of image in only 15 % of all cases. Therefore, 4D SRM USG may only be suitable for use as a complementary tool in the evaluation of fetal anomalies, especially those of the face, spine, extremity, and abdominal wall.

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

Access this article

Log in via an institution

Price excludes VAT (USA)
Tax calculation will be finalised during checkout.

Instant access to the full article PDF.

Institutional subscriptions

Fig. 1
Fig. 2
Fig. 3
Fig. 4
Fig. 5

Similar content being viewed by others

References

  1. Donald I, McVicar J, Brown TG (1961) Demonstration of tissue interfaces within the body by ultrasonic echo sounding. Br J Radiol 34:539–546

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  2. Levi S (1998) Routine ultrasound screening of congenital anomalies. An Overview of the European experience. Ann N Y Acad Sci 18(847):86–98

    Article  Google Scholar 

  3. Chaoui R, Heling KS (2006) Three-dimensional ultrasound in prenatal diagnosis. Curr Opin Obstet Gynecol 18(2):192–202

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  4. Kurjak A, Abo- Yaqoub S, Stanojevic M et al (2010) The potential of 4D sonography in the assessment of fetal neurobehavior-multicentric study in high risk pregnancies. J Perinat Med 38(1):77–82

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  5. Andonotopo W, Kurjak A (2006) The assessment of fetal behavior of growth restricted fetuses by 4D sonography. J Perinat Med 34(6):471–478

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  6. Yigiter AB, Kavak ZN (2006) Normal standards of fetal behavior assessed by four-dimensional sonography. J Matern Fetal Neonatal Med 19(11):707–721

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  7. Xu HX, Zhang QP, Lu MD, Wiao XT (2002) Comparison of two-dimensional and three-dimensional sonography in evaluating fetal malformations. J Clin Ultrasound 30(9):515–525

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  8. Gonçalves LF, Lee W, Espinoza J, Romero R (2005) Three and 4-dimensional ultrasound in obstetric practice: does it help? J Ultrasound Med 24(12):1599–1624

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  9. Baba K, Okai T, Kozuma S, Taketani Y (1999) Fetal abnormalities: evaluation with real-time-processible threedimensional US-preliminary report. Radiology 211(2):441–446

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  10. Kos M, Hafner T, Funduk-Kurjak B, Bozek T, Kurjak A (2002) Limb deformities and three-dimensionalultrasound. J Perinat Med 30(1):40–47

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  11. Merz E, Bahlmann F, Weber G (1995) Volume Scanning in the evaluation of fetal malformations. A new dimension in prenatal diagnosis. Ultrasound Obstet Gynecol 5(4):222–227

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  12. Johnson D, Pretorius DH, Riccabona M, Budorick NE, Nelson TR (1997) Three-dimensional ultrasound of the fetal spine. Obstet Gynecol 89(3):434–438

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  13. Garjian KV, Pretorius DH, Budorick NE, Cantrell CJ, Johnson DD, Nelson TR (2000) Fetal skeletal dysplasia: three-dimensional US_ Initial experience. Radiology 214(3):717–723

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  14. Pretorius D, Nelson T (1994) Prenatal visualization of cranial sutures and fontanelles with three-dimensional ultrasonography. J Ultrasound Med 13(11):871–876

    CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  15. Chaoui R, Levaillant JM, Benoit B, Faro C, Wegrzyn P, Nicolaides KH (2005) Three-dimensional sonographic description of abnormal metopic suture in second- and third- trimester fetuses. Ultrasound Obstet Gynecol 26(7):761–764

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  16. Gonçalves LF, Nien JK, Espinoza J et al (2006) What does 2-dimensional imaging add to 3-dimensional obstetric ultrasonography? J Ultrasound Med 25(6):691–699

    PubMed Central  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  17. Benaceraff BR (2006) Tomographic sonography of the fetus: is it accurate enough to be a frontline screen for fetal malformation? J Ultrasound Med 25(6):687–689

    Google Scholar 

Download references

Conflict of interest

None.

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. Dr. Sami Ulus Women Health and Research Hospital, Ankara, Turkey

    D. F. Öcal

  2. Department of Obstetrics and Gynecology, Faculty of Medicine, Gazi University, Ankara, Turkey

    T. Nas & İ. Güler

Authors
  1. D. F. Öcal
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  2. T. Nas
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  3. İ. Güler
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Corresponding author

Correspondence to D. F. Öcal.

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Check for updates. Verify currency and authenticity via CrossMark

Cite this article

Öcal, D.F., Nas, T. & Güler, İ. The place of four-dimensional ultrasound in evaluating fetal anomalies. Ir J Med Sci 184, 607–612 (2015). https://doi.org/10.1007/s11845-014-1184-2

Download citation

  • Received:

  • Accepted:

  • Published:

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s11845-014-1184-2

Keywords

Search

Navigation