Skip to main content

Advertisement

SpringerLink
Log in

3D and cinematic rendering of abdominopelvic pathology in the peripartum period

  • Review
  • Published:
Abdominal Radiology Aims and scope Submit manuscript

Abstract

3D with volume rendering and the more recently described technique of cinematic rendering are post-processing techniques that create reconstructions of cross sectional imaging data which enhance image interpretation. This review illustrates the potential applications of volume rendering, 3D, and cinematic rendering in the evaluation of abdominopelvic pathology in the peripartum period. These techniques show promise in improving visualization of pelvic structures, vascular mapping, highlighting textural differences between tissues, and improving understanding of spatial relationships.

Graphical abstract

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
Fig. 6
Fig. 7
Fig. 8
Fig. 9
Fig. 10
Fig. 11
Fig. 12

Similar content being viewed by others

Data availability

All data and materials support the published claims and comply with field standards.

Code availability

Not applicable.

References

  1. Eid M, De Cecco CN, Nance JW Jr, Caruso D, Albrecht MH, Spandorfer AJ, De Santis D, Varga-Szemes A, Schoepf UJ. Cinematic Rendering in CT: A Novel, Lifelike 3D Visualization Technique. AJR Am J Roentgenol. 2017;209(2):370-379. doi: https://doi.org/10.2214/AJR.17.17850. Epub 2017 May 15. PMID: 28504564.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  2. Dappa E, Higashigaito K, Fornaro J, Leschka S, Wildermuth S, Alkadhi H. Cinematic rendering - an alternative to volume rendering for 3D computed tomography imaging. Insights Imaging. 2016;7(6):849-856. doi: https://doi.org/10.1007/s13244-016-0518-1. Epub 2016 Sep 15. PMID: 27628743; PMCID: PMC5110476.

    Article  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  3. Elshafei M, Binder J, Baecker J, Brunner M, Uder M, Weber GF, Grützmann R, Krautz C. Comparison of Cinematic Rendering and Computed Tomography for Speed and Comprehension of Surgical Anatomy. JAMA Surg. 2019;154(8):738-744. doi: https://doi.org/10.1001/jamasurg.2019.1168. PMID: 31141115; PMCID: PMC6705138.

    Article  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  4. Johnson PT, Schneider R, Lugo-Fagundo C, Johnson MB, Fishman EK. MDCT Angiography With 3D Rendering: A Novel Cinematic Rendering Algorithm for Enhanced Anatomic Detail. AJR Am J Roentgenol. 2017;209(2):309-312. doi: https://doi.org/10.2214/AJR.17.17903. Epub 2017 Jun 7. PMID: 28590775.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  5. Soyer P. Cinematic rendering: When virtuality comes true. Diagn Interv Imaging. 2019;100(9):465-466. doi: https://doi.org/10.1016/j.diii.2019.06.005. Epub 2019 Jul 4. PMID: 31281073.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  6. Bueno MR, Estrela C, Granjeiro JM, Estrela MRA, Azevedo BC, Diogenes A. Cone-beam computed tomography cinematic rendering: clinical, teaching and research applications. Braz Oral Res. 2021;35:e024. doi: https://doi.org/10.1590/1807-3107bor-2021.vol35.0024. PMID: 33624709.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  7. Rowe SP, Pomper MG, Leal JP, Schneider R, Krüger S, Chu LC, Fishman EK. Photorealistic three-dimensional visualization of fusion datasets: cinematic rendering of PET/CT. Abdom Radiol (NY). 2022. doi: https://doi.org/10.1007/s00261-022-03614-1. Epub ahead of print. PMID: 35916942.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  8. Brookmeyer, C., Rowe, S.P., Chu, L.C. et al. Implementation of cinematic rendering of gastric masses into clinical practice: a pictorial review. Abdom Radiol 47, 3386–3393 (2022).https://doi.org/10.1007/s00261-022-03604-3

    Article  Google Scholar 

  9. Rowe, S.P., Pomper, M.G., Leal, J.P. et al. Photorealistic three-dimensional visualization of fusion datasets: cinematic rendering of PET/CT. Abdom Radiol 47, 3916–3920 (2022).https://doi.org/10.1007/s00261-022-03614-1

    Article  Google Scholar 

  10. ACR–SPR Practice Parameter for Imaging Pregnant or Potentially Pregnant Adolescents and Women with Ionizing Radiation. The American College of Radiology , 2018, https://www.acr.org/-/media/ACR/Files/Practice-Parameters/pregnant-pts.pdf.

  11. Rowe SP, Fishman EK. Fetal and placental anatomy visualized with cinematic rendering from volumetric CT data. Radiol Case Rep. 2017;13(1):281-283. doi: https://doi.org/10.1016/j.radcr.2017.09.028. PMID: 29487668; PMCID: PMC5826733.

    Article  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  12. Shetty MK. Abdominal computed tomography during pregnancy: a review of indications and fetal radiation exposure issues. Semin Ultrasound CT MR. 2010;31(1):3-7. doi: https://doi.org/10.1053/j.sult.2009.09.001. Epub 2010 Jan 14. PMID: 20102690.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  13. Spalluto LB, Woodfield CA, DeBenedectis CM, Lazarus E. MR imaging evaluation of abdominal pain during pregnancy: appendicitis and other nonobstetric causes. Radiographics. 2012;32(2):317-34. doi: https://doi.org/10.1148/rg.322115057. PMID: 22411935.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  14. Menias CO, Elsayes KM, Peterson CM, Huete A, Gratz BI, Bhalla S. CT of pregnancy-related complications. Emerg Radiol. 2007;13(6):299-306. doi: https://doi.org/10.1007/s10140-006-0570-0. Epub 2007 Jan 10. PMID: 17216173.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  15. Johnson PT, Fishman EK. Hereditary Hemorrhagic Telangiectasia: Cinematic Rendering of Hepatic Arteriovenous Malformations. Radiology. 2018;288(2):341. doi: https://doi.org/10.1148/radiol.2018180380. Epub 2018 Jun 19. PMID: 29916781.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  16. Chu LC, Rowe SP, Fishman EK. Cinematic rendering of focal liver masses. Diagn Interv Imaging. 2019;100(9):467-476. doi: https://doi.org/10.1016/j.diii.2019.04.003. Epub 2019 Apr 29. PMID: 31047840.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  17. Tang L, Wang Y, Yang X, Luo G, Zeng X, Wang R, Song B. Virtual or real: lifelike cinematic rendering of adrenal tumors. Quant Imaging Med Surg. 2021;11(8):3854-3866. doi: https://doi.org/10.21037/qims-20-1282. PMID: 34341754; PMCID: PMC8245928.

    Article  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  18. Chu LC, Johnson PT, Fishman EK. Cinematic rendering of pancreatic neoplasms: preliminary observations and opportunities. Abdom Radiol (NY). 2018;43(11):3009-3015. doi: https://doi.org/10.1007/s00261-018-1559-3. PMID: 29550959.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  19. Javed AA, Young RWC, Habib JR, Kinny-Köster B, Cohen SM, Fishman EK, Wolfgang CL. Cinematic Rendering: Novel Tool for Improving Pancreatic Cancer Surgical Planning. Curr Probl Diagn Radiol. 2022 doi: https://doi.org/10.1067/j.cpradiol.2022.04.001. Epub ahead of print. PMID: 35595587.

    Article  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  20. Binder JS, Scholz M, Ellmann S, Uder M, Grützmann R, Weber GF, Krautz C. Cinematic Rendering in Anatomy: A Crossover Study Comparing a Novel 3D Reconstruction Technique to Conventional Computed Tomography. Anat Sci Educ. 2021;14(1):22-31. doi: https://doi.org/10.1002/ase.1989. Epub 2020 Jul 7. PMID: 32521121.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  21. Tornow, K., Bishop, K. & Browning, T. Incidental fetal imaging with CT: a pictorial essay. Abdom Radiol 44, 3408–3431 (2019).

    Article  Google Scholar 

  22. Fylstra DL. Ectopic pregnancy not within the (distal) fallopian tube: etiology, diagnosis, and treatment. Am J Obstet Gynecol. 2012;206(4):289-99. doi: https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ajog.2011.10.857. Epub 2011 Oct 20. PMID: 22177188.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  23. Chukus A, Tirada N, Restrepo R, Reddy NI. Uncommon Implantation Sites of Ectopic Pregnancy: Thinking beyond the Complex Adnexal Mass. Radiographics. 2015;35(3):946-59. doi: https://doi.org/10.1148/rg.2015140202. Epub 2015 Apr 10. PMID: 25860721.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  24. Silver RM, Branch DW. Placenta Accreta Spectrum. N Engl J Med. 2018;378(16):1529-1536. doi: https://doi.org/10.1056/NEJMcp1709324. PMID: 29669225.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  25. Elsayes KM, Trout AT, Friedkin AM, Liu PS, Bude RO, Platt JF, Menias CO. Imaging of the placenta: a multimodality pictorial review. Radiographics. 2009;29(5):1371-91. doi: https://doi.org/10.1148/rg.295085242. PMID: 19755601.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  26. Zilberman A, Eisenberg V, Yoeli R, Soriano D, Sivan E, Golan G, Mashiach R. Uterine Artery Pseudoaneurysm in a Pregnant Patient with Retrocervical Endometriosis. J Minim Invasive Gynecol. 2020;27(5):1209-1213. doi: https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jmig.2020.03.010. Epub 2020 Apr 5. PMID: 32259651.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  27. Raniga SB, Mittal AK, Bernstein M, Skalski MR, Al-Hadidi AM. Multidetector CT in Vascular Injuries Resulting from Pelvic Fractures: A Primer for Diagnostic Radiologists. Radiographics. 2019;39(7):2111-2129. doi: https://doi.org/10.1148/rg.2019190062.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  28. Zhu Z, Li H, Zhang J. Uterine dehiscence in pregnant with previous caesarean delivery. Ann Med. 2021 ;53(1):1265-1269. doi: https://doi.org/10.1080/07853890.2021.1959049. PMID: 34309465; PMCID: PMC8317916.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  29. Gui B, Danza FM, Valentini AL, Laino ME, Caruso A, Carducci B, Rodolfino E, Devicienti E, Bonomo L. Multidetector CT appearance of the pelvis after cesarean delivery: normal and abnormal acute findings. Diagn Interv Radiol. 2016;22(6):534-541.

    Article  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  30. Aboughalia, H., Basavalingu, D., Revzin, M.V. et al. Imaging evaluation of uterine perforation and rupture. Abdom Radiol 46, 4946–4966 (2021).https://doi.org/10.1007/s00261-021-03171-z

    Article  Google Scholar 

  31. Sierra A, Burrel M, Sebastia C, Radosevic A, Barrufet M, Albela S, Buñesch L, Domingo MA, Salvador R, Real I. Utility of multidetector CT in severe postpartum hemorrhage. Radiographics. 2012;32(5):1463-81. doi: https://doi.org/10.1148/rg.325115113. PMID: 22977030.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  32. Gui B, Corvino M, Grimaldi PP, Russo L, Marco MD, Valentini AL, Carducci B, Lanzone A, Manfredi R. Multidetector CT appearance of the pelvis after vaginal delivery: normal appearances and abnormal acute findings. Diagn Interv Radiol. 2019;25(3):210-218. doi: https://doi.org/10.5152/dir.2019.18127. PMID: 31063140; PMCID: PMC6521907.

    Article  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  33. Katz, L., Levy, A., Wiznitzer, A. et al. Pregnancy outcome of patients with dermoid and other benign ovarian cysts. Arch Gynecol Obstet 281, 811–815 (2010). https://doi.org/10.1007/s00404-009-1158-1

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  34. Mukhopadhyay A, Shinde A, Naik R. Ovarian cysts and cancer in pregnancy. Best Pract Res Clin Obstet Gynaecol. 2016;33:58-72. doi: https://doi.org/10.1016/j.bpobgyn.2015.10.015. Epub 2015 Oct 30. PMID: 26707193.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

Download references

Funding

Not applicable.

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. Department of Radiology and Radiological Science, The Russell H. Morgan, Johns Hopkins University School of Medicine, 601 N. Caroline St., JHOC 3150, Baltimore, MD, 21287, USA

    Naveen Ghuman, Elliot K. Fishman & Erin Gomez

Authors
  1. Naveen Ghuman
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  2. Elliot K. Fishman
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  3. Erin Gomez
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Contributions

All authors contributed to the study conception and design. Material preparation and image collection were performed by Naveen Ghuman, Erin Gomez, and Elliot K. Fishman. The first draft of the manuscript was written by Naveen Ghuman and all authors commented on previous versions of the manuscript. All authors read and approved the final manuscript.

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Naveen Ghuman.

Ethics declarations

Conflict of interest

Elliot K. Fishman, MD gets research support from Siemens Healthineers and GE Healthcare. He is a co-founder of HipGraphics Inc. and a consultant to Imaging Endpoints and Exact Sciences.

Ethical approval

Not applicable.

Consent to participate

Not applicable.

Consent for publication

Not applicable.

Additional information

Publisher's Note

Springer Nature remains neutral with regard to jurisdictional claims in published maps and institutional affiliations.

Rights and permissions

Springer Nature or its licensor (e.g. a society or other partner) holds exclusive rights to this article under a publishing agreement with the author(s) or other rightsholder(s); author self-archiving of the accepted manuscript version of this article is solely governed by the terms of such publishing agreement and applicable law.

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Check for updates. Verify currency and authenticity via CrossMark

Cite this article

Ghuman, N., Fishman, E.K. & Gomez, E. 3D and cinematic rendering of abdominopelvic pathology in the peripartum period. Abdom Radiol 48, 1383–1394 (2023). https://doi.org/10.1007/s00261-022-03743-7

Download citation

  • Received:

  • Revised:

  • Accepted:

  • Published:

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s00261-022-03743-7

Keywords

Search

Navigation