scholarly journals P14.02: Does endometrial thickness and appearance at transvaginal ultrasound scan assist in triaging women with pregnancy of unknown location?

2019 ◽  
Vol 54 (S1) ◽  
pp. 199-199
Author(s):  
A. Ramachandran ◽  
J. Ludlow
Keyword(s):  
Endometrial Thickness ◽  
Transvaginal Ultrasound ◽  
Ultrasound Scan ◽  
Transvaginal Ultrasound Scan ◽  
Pregnancy Of Unknown Location

scholarly journals Clinical relevance of routine transvaginal ultrasound in women referred with pelvic organ prolapse

2021 ◽  
Vol 21 (1) ◽  
Author(s):  
Lone Pedersen ◽  
Marianne Glavind-Kristensen ◽  
Pinar Bor
Keyword(s):  
Pelvic Organ Prolapse ◽  
Incidental Findings ◽  
Transvaginal Ultrasound ◽  
Pelvic Organ ◽  
University Hospital ◽  
Ultrasound Scan ◽  
Ultrasound Findings ◽  
Gynaecological Examination ◽  
Prolapse Symptoms ◽  
Transvaginal Ultrasound Scan

Abstract Background The aim of this study was to investigate the prevalence of incidental findings on transvaginal ultrasound scan in women referred with pelvic organ prolapse by a general practitioner and to investigate which further examinations and treatments were performed as a result of these findings. Methods This was a retrospective cohort study that investigated women with pelvic organ prolapse referred to the outpatient urogynaecological clinics at Randers Regional Hospital and Aarhus University Hospital, Denmark. Results A total of 521 women were included and all of them were examined with a routine transvaginal ultrasound scan and a gynaecological examination. Prolapse symptoms only and no specific indication for transvaginal ultrasound scan were seen in 507 women (97.3%), while 14 women (2.7%) received scans on indication. Among the latter women, five (35.7%) had cancer. In the women with solely prolapse symptoms, 59 (11.6%) had incidental findings on transvaginal ultrasound scan, but all were benign. However, two patients were later diagnosed with cancer unrelated to the initial ultrasound findings. The treatment was extended with further examinations not related to POP in 19 of the women (32.2%) with incidental ultrasound findings. Conclusion The prevalence of incidental ultrasound findings was not high in the women referred with pelvic organ prolapse and no additional symptoms, and all these findings were benign. However, it should be considered that these findings resulted in further investigations and changes to the patients’ initial treatment plans. A meticulous anamnesis and digital vaginal examination are crucial to rule out the need for vaginal ultrasound.

P–727 Prevalence of ultrasound-detected gynaecological pathology in a One-Stop fertility clinic

2021 ◽  
Vol 36 (Supplement_1) ◽  
Author(s):  
X Foo ◽  
T Lukaszewski ◽  
E Yasmin ◽  
D Mavrelos
Keyword(s):  
Transvaginal Ultrasound ◽  
Demographic Data ◽  
Uterine Fibroids ◽  
Ovarian Cysts ◽  
Ultrasound Scan ◽  
Electronic Database ◽  
Polycystic Ovaries ◽  
Fertility Clinic ◽  
One Stop ◽  
Transvaginal Ultrasound Scan

Abstract Study question What is the prevalence of abnormal findings on transvaginal ultrasound scan (TVS) in a population of women presenting with subfertility to a One-Stop fertility clinic? Summary answer Two thirds of women in our population had ultrasound-detected pathology. The five commonest pathologies were uterine fibroids, polycystic ovaries, endometriosis, adenomyosis and benign ovarian cysts. What is known already Gynaecological pathology is common in women presenting with subfertility. However, their prevalence varies depending on the age, geography, background health of the population and study design. Few prevalence studies performed in the general female population show definitive associations with subfertility. As imaging techniques become increasingly sophisticated and patient demographics evolve over time, the prevalence of gynaecological pathology is anticipated to change. Understanding their prevalence in a subfertile population would shed light on the burden of disease, providing information about prevention strategies and service priorities. There are no published studies on the prevalence of ultrasound-detected gynaecological pathology in the subfertile population. Study design, size, duration This was a retrospective cross-sectional study of 1558 women presenting to a One-Stop fertility clinic of a university teaching hospital between January 2012 and December 2020. Participants/materials, setting, methods Women who attend the clinic routinely have their demographic data and a detailed clinical history taken prior to a transvaginal ultrasound scan. A clinical examiner trained in transvaginal ultrasonography performs the ultrasound examination in a standardized fashion. Ultrasound features and diagnoses are systematically recorded in an electronic database. We obtained demographic data and details of gynaecological diagnoses from the electronic database. We analysed the data using descriptive statistics and reported our results as proportions. Main results and the role of chance The median age of women at the time of scan was 35 years (range 21–46 years). The mean Body Mass Index was 24.8 kg/m2 (range 16.9–50.4 kg/ m2). The median duration of subfertility was 24 months (range 3–168 months). 472/1558 (30.3%, 95% CI 28.0–32.6) women had normal pelvic scans. The most frequent pathology seen in our population was uterine fibroids (410/1558, 26.3%; CI 24.1–28.6); 10.5% of these fibroids distorted the uterine cavity. Polycystic ovaries were the next most common pathology (363/1558, 23.3%; CI 21.2–25.4), followed by endometriosis (177/1558, 11.4%; CI 9.8–13.0), adenomyosis (160/1558, 10.3%; CI 8.8–11.9) and benign ovarian cysts (122/1558, 7.8%; CI 6.6–9.3). The other abnormalities seen on scan included congenital uterine anomalies (81/1558, 5.2%; CI 4.2–6.4), endometrial polyps (69/1558, 4.4%; CI 3.5–5.6), pelvic adhesions (44/1558, 2.8%; CI 2.1–3.8) and intrauterine adhesions (13/1558, 0.8%; CI 0.5–1.4). Of the 1086 women with abnormal scans, 832 (76.6%, CI 74.0–79.1) had one pathology detected on TVS and 254 (23.4%, CI 20.9–26.0) had more than one pathology detected. Limitations, reasons for caution A limitation of our study was the lack of histological confirmation of the ultrasound findings. Due to our smaller sample size, our prevalence could potentially be overestimated. Wider implications of the findings: The relevance of each pathology to chances of conception requires further examination to avoid under- or overtreating women in their fertility journey. Our findings may provide a background for future correlation studies. Furthermore, a scan quality assessment may be considered if the detection rate is substantially different in similar populations. Trial registration number Not applicable

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document