Добавил:
Sekretar
kiopkiopkiop18@yandex.ru
t.me/Prokururor I Вовсе не секретарь, но почту проверяю
Опубликованный материал нарушает ваши авторские права? Сообщите нам.
Вуз:
Предмет:
Файл:Ординатура / Хирургия / Библиотека им академика М.И. Перельмана / Книга_5824_Библиотеки_им_академика_М_И_Перельмана.pdf
X
- •Foreword
- •Preface
- •Acknowledgments
- •Contents
- •Contributors
- •1: Ultrasound in Reproductive Medicine: Is It Safe?
- •Introduction
- •A Short Review of Ultrasound Physics
- •Instrument Outputs
- •Ultrasound Bioeffects
- •The Output Indices
- •Ovarian Scanning
- •Ultrasound and the Ovum
- •Embryo/Fetus Susceptibility
- •Safety Aspects of Ultrasound in Ovulation Induction and Early Gestation
- •Summary and Recommendations
- •References
- •Tissue Characteristics
- •2: Principles of 3D Ultrasound
- •Introduction
- •Basic Techniques of 3D US
- •Reconstruction and Visualization of 3D Images and Post-processing
- •Advantages and Shortcomings of 3D US Techniques
- •Applications of 3D Ultrasound in ART
- •Conclusions
- •References
- •Introduction
- •Endometrial Blood Flow
- •Blood Flow of Uterine Vessels
- •Endometrial and Subendometrial Blood Flow by 2D Doppler
- •Endometrial and Subendometrial Blood Flow by 3D Doppler
- •Changes in Endometrial and Subendometrial Blood Flow
- •Prediction of Ovarian Response to Gonadotrophin
- •Ovarian Stromal Blood Flow by 2D Doppler
- •Ovarian Stromal Blood Flow by 3D Doppler
- •Conclusion
- •References
- •4: Legal Aspects of Ultrasound Imaging in Reproductive Medicine
- •Legal Aspects of Ultrasound Imaging in Reproductive Medicine
- •Performance of the Ultrasound Study
- •Personnel Performing Ultrasound Examinations
- •Adequacy of the Ultrasound Study
- •Ultrasound Supervision
- •Image Acquisition and Retention
- •Equipment Maintenance
- •Study Interpretation and Reporting
- •New Horizons in Ultrasound Liability
- •First-Trimester Ultrasound
- •Healthcare Fraud
- •Conclusion
- •References
- •5: The Normal Ovary (Changes in the Menstrual Cycle)
- •Transabdominal Ultrasound
- •Transvaginal Ultrasound
- •Postmenopausal Ovaries
- •Premenarchal Ovaries
- •Reproductive Age Ovaries
- •Color Doppler of the Normal Ovary
- •TVCD in Preovulatory Phase
- •TVCD and the Corpus Luteum
- •Three-Dimensional Ultrasound Visualization of the Normal Ovary
- •Volume of the Ovary
- •Antral Follicle Count (AFC)
- •3D of the Dominant Follicle, Ovulation, and Formation of Corpus Luteum
- •3D Power Doppler of the Preovulatory Follicle and Corpus Luteum
- •References
- •6: Ovarian Reserve and Ovarian Cysts
- •Introduction
- •Antral Follicle Count and Ovarian Reserve
- •Endocrine Markers of Ovarian Reserve
- •3D Ultrasound and Ovarian Volume
- •Evaluation of Ovarian Stroma Flow with 3D Ultrasound
- •Ovarian Cysts and Masses
- •Ultrasound and Polycystic Ovary (PCO)
- •Antral Follicle Count and SonoAVC
- •Conclusions
- •References
- •7: Ultrasound and PCOS
- •The Polycystic Ovarian Morphology
- •Follicle Number and Size
- •Ovarian Volume
- •Stromal Area, Volume, and Echogenicity
- •Ovarian Stromal Blood Flow
- •Uterine Size and Perfusion
- •Ultrasound and Assisted Reproduction Outcome
- •Ultrasound and Prevention of OHSS
- •Future Points
- •References
- •8: The Normal Uterus
- •Uterus
- •Myometrium
- •Endometrium
- •Cervix
- •References
- •Uterus Didelphys
- •Bicornuate Uterus
- •Septate Uterus
- •Arcuate Uterus
- •Müllerian Agenesis
- •Clinical Presentation of Congenital Uterine Anomalies
- •Imaging of Congenital Uterine Anomalies
- •Hysterosalpingography
- •Two-Dimensional Ultrasonography
- •Pelvic Magnetic Resonance Imaging
- •Three-Dimensional Ultrasonography
- •Urinary Tract Imaging
- •9: Congenital Uterine Anomalies
- •Introduction
- •Embryology of the Female Reproductive Tract
- •Overview of the Uterine Anomalies
- •Unicornuate Uterus
- •Reproductive Outcomes with Uterine Anomalies
- •Indications for Surgical Intervention
- •Conclusion
- •References
- •10: Uterine Fibroids
- •Background
- •Fibroids and Fertility
- •Fibroids and IVF
- •Myomas and Obstetrical Outcomes
- •Diagnosis of Uterine Fibroids
- •Ultrasound
- •Saline Infusion Sonohysterography
- •Magnetic Resonance Imaging
- •Management of Uterine Fibroids
- •Observation
- •Surgery
- •Hysteroscopic Myomectomy
- •Abdominal Myomectomy
- •Laparoscopic Myomectomy
- •Uterine Artery Embolization
- •MRgFUS
- •Conclusion
- •References
- •11: Endometrial Polyps
- •Introduction
- •Diagnosis
- •Transvaginal Ultrasonography
- •Sonohysterography
- •Three-Dimensional TVUS and Three- Dimensional SIS
- •Other Imaging Modalities
- •False-Positive, False-Negative, and Artifacts
- •Impact of Polyps on Fertility
- •Polyps and Assisted Reproductive Technology
- •Intrauterine Lesions in Patients with Recurrent Implantation Failure
- •Conclusion
- •References
- •12: Intrauterine Adhesions
- •Introduction
- •Incidence
- •Manifestation
- •Causes
- •Risk Factors
- •Effects
- •Diagnosis
- •The Role of Ultrasound in the Diagnosis
- •Management of IUA
- •Hysteroscopic Surgery
- •Treatment Outcome
- •Role of Ultrasonography in the Treatment
- •Radiographic Methods
- •Prevention of IUA
- •Mechanical Barriers
- •Fluid Barriers
- •Tissue Barriers
- •Recent Advances
- •Conclusion
- •References
- •13: Sonohysterography in Reproductive Medicine
- •Introduction
- •SHG vs. Hysteroscopy
- •Practice Guidelines for SHG
- •Indication and Contraindication
- •SHG Procedure [ 14, 27, 28, 32 ]
- •SHG for Congenital Uterine Anomalies
- •SHG for Acquired Uterine Abnormalities
- •2D vs. 3D SHG
- •Gel Instillation SHG
- •No Pain with SHG
- •Conclusions
- •References
- •14: Evaluation of Tubal Patency (HyCoSy, Doppler)
- •Laparoscopy and Dye Test (Chromopertubation)
- •Hysterosalpingography (HSG)
- •The Technique
- •Three-Dimensional Coded Contrast Imaging (3D CCI) During HyCoSy
- •Blood-Flow and Doppler Imaging
- •Conclusion
- •References
- •15: Hydrosalpinx
- •Introduction
- •Anatomy of the Fallopian Tube
- •Tubal Function
- •Signs and Symptoms
- •Effects on Pregnancy
- •Imaging
- •Hysterosalpingogram (HSG)
- •Ultrasound Appearance
- •Color Doppler Sonography
- •Contrast Medium
- •Three-Dimensional (3-D) Ultrasound
- •Utility of Tubal Surgery
- •Assisted Reproduction
- •Conclusions
- •References
- •16: Virtual Hysterosalpingography: A New Diagnostic Technique for the Study of the Female Reproductive Tract
- •General Concepts
- •Clinical Experience with Virtual Hysterosalpingography in Reproductive Medicine
- •Cervical Pathology in Infertility
- •Pathology of the Endometrial Cavity in Infertility
- •Evaluation of the Fallopian Tubes
- •Conclusions
- •References
- •17: Ultrasound in Male Infertility
- •Introduction
- •Overview of Genitourinary Ultrasonography
- •Scrotal Ultrasonography
- •Paratesticular Structures
- •Epididymis
- •Varicocele
- •Vas Deferens
- •Testicular Ultrasound
- •Cryptorchidism
- •Cysts, Hydrocele, Infectious Processes
- •Testicular Masses
- •Microlithiasis
- •Testicular Torsion/Trauma
- •Transrectal Ultrasonography
- •Prostate
- •Cysts
- •Ejaculatory Duct Obstruction
- •Seminal Vesicles
- •Assisted Reproductive Techniques
- •Conclusion
- •References
- •18: Ultrasound in Follicle Monitoring for Ovulation Induction/IUI
- •Follicular Selection: Morphological and Ultrasound Observations
- •The Role of Doppler in Reproduction
- •Ovulation Induction and Intrauterine Insemination (IUI)
- •Multiple Pregnancies
- •Polycystic Ovarian Syndrome (PCOS)
- •The Classical Picture of PCOS
- •Ultrasound Diagnosis
- •Induction of Ovulation
- •Selection of Patients
- •Technical Tips on How to Scan the Ovaries and Follicular Growth
- •Clomiphene Citrate
- •Antiestrogenic Effects on the Cervix and Endometrium
- •Treatment Schema and Monitoring of Clomiphene Citrate Therapy
- •Gonadotropins
- •Clomiphene Citrate and hMG
- •The Help of Ultrasound: Assessing Complications
- •Final Remarks
- •References
- •19: 2D Ultrasound in Follicle Monitoring for ART
- •Introduction
- •Why Monitor the Follicular Phase?
- •Normal Folliculogenesis
- •Monitoring Follicular Maturation
- •Methods for Monitoring
- •Standard Ultrasound Monitoring Program
- •Follicular Size and Volume
- •Criteria Used for Triggering Ovulation
- •How to Predict Retrieval of Mature Oocytes?
- •Monitoring of Endometrial Proliferation
- •Monitoring with 2D Versus 3D
- •Monitoring with Power Doppler (In Relation to 2D)
- •Conclusion
- •References
- •20: 3D Ultrasound for Follicle Monitoring in ART
- •Introduction
- •Use of 3D Ultrasound of the Female Reproductive System Before and During IVF in Regard to Endometrial Receptivity
- •US Monitoring of Polycystic Ovary Syndrome (PCOS) Patients
- •Ultrasound in Estimation of the Ovarian Reserve
- •Follicle Tracking During Controlled Ovarian Hyperstimulation
- •New Applications of 3D US
- •Optimal Outpatient Monitoring
- •Conclusions
- •References
- •21: Ultrasound-Guided Surgical Procedures
- •Introduction
- •Ultrasound Guidance at Time of Uterine Surgery: Uterine Septum Resection, Myoma Excision, Synechiae Lysis, Intrauterine Foreign Bodies, Hematometra
- •Uterine Septum
- •Submucosal Fibroids
- •Synechiae
- •Intrauterine Foreign Bodies
- •Hematometra
- •Limitations of the Technique
- •Summary
- •Ovarian Cyst and Hydrosalpinx Aspiration
- •Ovarian Cyst Aspiration
- •Hydrosalpinx Aspiration
- •Oocyte Retrieval
- •Embryo Transfer
- •Intrauterine Device Placement and Removal
- •Conclusion
- •References
- •22: Ultrasound Role in Embryo Transfers
- •Introduction
- •Transvaginal Versus Transabdominal Ultrasound for ET
- •Training in Embryo Transfer
- •Conclusion
- •References
- •23: Ultrasound and Ovarian Hyperstimulation Syndrome
- •Ultrasound in the Prediction of Ovarian Hyperstimulation Syndrome
- •Ultrasound in the Diagnosis of Ovarian Hyperstimulation Syndrome
- •Ultrasound in the Management and Treatment of Ovarian Hyperstimulation Syndrome
- •References
- •24: Pregnancy of Unknown Viability
- •Introduction
- •Early Pregnancy Complications: Vaginal Bleeding and Pelvic Pain
- •History and Physical Exam
- •β-hCG
- •Progesterone
- •Ultrasound
- •Ultrasound Characteristics of Normal Intrauterine Pregnancy
- •Ultrasound Characteristics of Abnormal Pregnancy
- •Pregnancy of Unknown Location (PUL)
- •Ultrasound Characteristics of Early Pregnancy Failure and Intrauterine Pregnancy of Unknown Viability
- •Conclusion
- •References
- •25: Ultrasound Evaluation of Ectopic Pregnancy
- •Cervical Pregnancy
- •Ovarian Pregnancy
- •Abdominal Pregnancy
- •Cesarean Scar Ectopic Pregnancy
- •Interstitial Ectopic Pregnancy
- •Ectopic After Hysterectomy
- •Summary
- •References
- •26: Focused Ultrasound for Treatment of Fibroids
- •Introduction
- •How Does It Work?
- •Patient Selection
- •Impact on Future Fertility
- •Other Conditions That Can Be Treated
- •Adenomyosis
- •Patient Preparation
- •Treatment
- •Outcomes
- •Cost
- •Conclusion
- •References
- •Index

22 Ultrasound Role in Embryo Transfers
Fig. 22.6 Abdominal US
depicts the external coaxial
catheter wedged into the
endometrium in an anteverted uterus ( lower fi gure ).
Sliding a rehearsal inner
catheter allows proper
placement in the lower
uterine segment ( upper
fi gure )
299
factor in obtaining high ET success rates was the
actual performance of live ETs rather than practicing US-guided IUIs. Thus, how training in
embryo transfer should be performed remains a
controversy [ 3 ].
Coaxial catheter US-guided ET approach
involves initial placement of an outer catheter in
the internal uterine os (Fig. 22.6 ). The outer cath-
eter protects the inner catheter from mucus exposure and eliminates the need to renegotiate a
deviated or a branching cervical canal. In this
instance, time is not a limiting factor because the
embryos are loaded into the inner catheter while
the outer catheter is already in place. US will then
allow ET time to be less than 30 s (Fig. 22.7 ).
US guidance is extremely instructive at training
facilities as it can provide feedback and reassurance to physicians in training. Coaxial live US
guided ET allows teaching ET without a decline
in the center’s PR.

300
Fig. 22.7 Abdominal US
demonstrates that the outer
coaxial catheter is withdrawn
leaving the inner soft
embryo- loaded catheter at
one cm from the uterine
fundus ( lower fi gure ). Under
live US observation, the
embryo is injected and the
marker bubble is observed in
mid-cavity ( upper fi gure )
E. Confi no et al.
Disadvantages of UltrasoundGuided ET
When using US for ET, there is a signifi cant
increase in the time and space needed. It is obvious that US equipment and trained US personnel
are needed. Cross-training of the existing IVF
staff to provide US guidance eliminates the need
for an additional US technician. The clinical
experience of the ultrasonographer assisting
US-guided ET had no effect on the clinical outcome [ 28 ]. Because of the full bladder required
for transabdominal US, patients may suffer from
discomfort and cramping. Emptying the bladder
after ET may cause concern of losing embryos at
that time. This psychological stress may be
resolved with reassurance that the embryo will
not “pop out” with urination.
Some physicians prefer tactile ET to minimize
the need to observe the cervix and the US screen
simultaneously and avoid the need for additional
personnel. They also state that the use of US
technique may slow the ET and require additional steps. Pre-ET vaginal ultrasound may be

22 Ultrasound Role in Embryo Transfers
301
performed to reassess the cervix and uterus
(Fig. 22.3 ). Pre-ET US may measure the
endometrial lining, detect the presence of fl uid
in the endometrial cavity, and retrace on the
screen the measurement of the desired depth to
achieve the ideal ET. However, a recent RCT
involving single physician operator confi rmed
that US guidance signifi cantly increased clinical
pregnancies and live birth rates compared to the
clinical touch method [ 29 ].
Conclusion
Evidence-based guidelines encourage
US-guided ET. This approach will result
in easier ETs and better PRs. Diffi cult,
long, and bloody ET should be avoided.
Recommendations based on expert opinions include the performance of a mock ET
to identify a diffi cult ET, meticulous cervical
mucus removal, mid uterine cavity embryo
placement, a slow catheter withdrawal to
avoid embryo dragging to the cervix, and a
short embryo load to unload time [ 30 , 31 ].
US has become an indispensable tool used
to prepare the patient for the upcoming ET
and monitor, guide, and verify proper embryo
deposition in the uterus. Importantly, patients
take great comfort in having the ability to
visualize the fi nal step of a diffi cult process.
The use of US guidance is an integral part of a
perfect ET and is only expanding to improve
and may include 3D and 4D ultrasound.
References
1. Tarlatzis BC, Laufer N, Decherney AH. The use of
ovarian ultrasonography in monitoring ovulation
induction. J In Vitro Fert Embryo Transf. 1984;1:
226–32.
2. Peluso JJ, Damien M, Nulsen JC, Luciano AA.
Identifi cation of follicles with fertilizable oocytes by
sequential ultrasound measurements during follicular
development. J In Vitro Fert Embryo Transf. 1990;7:
304–9.
3. Bishop L, Brezina PR, Segars J. Training in embryo
transfer: how should it be done? Fertil Steril. 2013;
100(2):351–2.
4. Strickler RC, Christianson C, Crane JP, Curato A,
Knight AB, Yang V. Ultrasound guidance for human
embryo transfer. Fertil Steril. 1985;43:54–61.
5. Sallam HN, Sadek SS. Ultrasound-guided embryo
transfer: a meta-analysis of randomized controlled trials. Fertil Steril. 2003;80:1042–6.
6. Matorras R, Urquijo E, Mendoza R, Corcostegui B,
Exposito A, Rodriguez-Escudero FJ. Ultrasoundguided embryo transfer improves pregnancy rates and
increases the frequency of easy transfers. Hum
Reprod. 2002;17:1762–6.
7. Yoldemir T, Erenus M. Does the timing of mock
embryo transfer trial improve implantation in intracytoplasmic sperm injection cycles? Gynecol
Endocrinol. 2011;27:396–400.
8. Mansour R, Aboulghar M, Serour G. Dummy embryo
transfer: a technique that minimizes the problems of
embryo transfer and improves the pregnancy rate in
human in vitro fertilization. Fertil Steril. 1990;54:
678–81.
9. Gera PS, Allemand MC, Tatpati LL, Galanits TM,
Morbeck D, Coddington CC. Role of saline infusion
sonography in uterine evaluation before frozen
embryo transfer cycle. Fertil Steril. 2008;89:562–6.
10. Sankpal RS, Confi no E, Matzel A, Cohen LS.
Investigation of the uterine cavity and fallopian tubes
using three-dimensional saline sonohysterosalpingography. Int J Gynaecol Obstet. 2001;73:125–9.
11. Abou-Setta AM, Mansour RT, Al-Inany HG,
Aboulghar MM, Aboulghar MA, Serour GI. Among
women undergoing embryo transfer, is the probability
of pregnancy and live birth improved with ultrasound
guidance over clinical touch alone? A systemic review
and meta-analysis of prospective randomized trials.
Fertil Steril. 2007;88:333–41.
12. Brown JA, Buckingham K, Abou-Setta A, Buckett W.
Ultrasound versus ‘clinical touch’ for catheter guidance during embryo transfer in women. Cochrane
Database Syst Rev. 2007;24(1):CD006107.
13. Brown J, Buckingham K, Abou-Setta AM, Buckett
W. Ultrasound versus ‘clinical touch’ for catheter
guidance during embryo transfer in women. Cochrane
Database Syst Rev. 2010;(1):CD006107.
14. Flisser E, Grifo JA. Is what we clearly see really so
obvious? Ultrasonography and transcervical embryo
transfer–a review. Fertil Steril. 2007;87:1–5.
15. Pope CS, Cook EK, Arny M, Novak A, Grow DR.
Infl uence of embryo transfer depth on in vitro fertilization and embryo transfer outcomes. Fertil Steril.
2004;81:51–8.
16. Frankfurter D, Trimarchi JB, Silva CP, Keefe DL.
Middle to lower uterine segment embryo transfer
improves implantation and pregnancy rates compared
with fundal embryo transfer. Fertil Steril. 2004;81:
1273–7.
17. Tiras B, Korucuoglu U, Polat M, Saltik A, Zeyneloglu
HB, Yarali H. Effect of blood and mucus on the success rates of embryo transfers. Eur J Obstet, Gynecol
Reprod Biol. 2012;165:239–42.
18. Allahbadia GN, Kadam K, Gandhi G, Arora S,
Valliappan JB, Joshi A, et al. Embryo transfer using
the SureView catheter-beacon in the womb. Fertil
Steril. 2010;93:344–50.

302
E. Confi no et al.
19. Henne MB, Milki AA. Uterine position at real embryo
transfer compared with mock embryo transfer. Hum
Reprod. 2004;19:570–2.
20. Kato O, Takatsuka R, Asch RH. Transvaginaltransmyometrial embryo transfer: the Towako method;
experiences of 104 cases. Fertil Steril. 1993;59:51–3.
21. Groutz A, Lessing JB, Wolf Y, Azem F, Yovel I, Amit
A. Comparison of transmyometrial and transcervical
embryo transfer in patients with previously failed in
vitro fertilization-embryo transfer cycles and/or cervical stenosis. Fertil Steril. 1997;67:1073–6.
22. Porat N, Boehnlein LM, Schouweiler CM, Kang J,
Lindheim SR. Interim analysis of a randomized clinical trial comparing abdominal versus transvaginal
ultrasound-guided embryo transfer. J Obstet Gynaecol
Res. 2010;36:384–92.
23. Bodri D, Colodron M, Garcia D, Obradors A,
Vernaeve V, Coll O. Transvaginal versus transabdominal ultrasound guidance for embryo transfer in donor
oocyte recipients: a randomized clinical trial. Fertil
Steril. 2011;95:2263–8, 8e1.
24. Karande VC, Morris R, Chapman C, Rinehart J,
Gleicher N. Impact of the “physician factor” on pregnancy rates in a large assisted reproductive technology program: do too many cooks spoil the broth?
Fertil Steril. 1999;71:1001–9.
25. Woolcott R, Stanger J. Ultrasound tracking of the
movement of embryo-associated air bubbles on standing after transfer. Hum Reprod. 1998;13:2107–9.
26. Confi no E, Zhang J, Risquez F. Air bubble migration
is a random event post embryo transfer. J Assist
Reprod Genet. 2007;24:223–6.
27. Shah DK, Missmer SA, Correia KF, Racowsky C,
Ginsburg E. Effi cacy of intrauterine inseminations as
a training modality for performing embryo transfer in
reproductive endocrinology and infertility fellowship
programs. Fertil Steril. 2013;100:386–91.
28. Harris ID, Styer AK, Petrozza JC. Ultrasonographer
experience does not impact outcomes following
ultrasound- guided embryo transfer. Fertil Steril.
2009;92:918–22.
29. Eskandar M, Abou-Setta AM, Almushait MA,
El-Amin M, Mohmad SE. Ultrasound guidance
during embryo transfer: a prospective, singleoperator, randomized, controlled trial. Fertil Steril.
2008;90:1187–90.
30. Ebner T, Yaman C, Moser M, Sommergruber M, Polz
W, Tews G. The ineffective loading process of the
embryo transfer catheter alters implantation and pregnancy rates. Fertil Steril. 2001;76:630–2.
31. Mains L, Van Voorhis BJ. Optimizing the technique
of embryo transfer. Fertil Steril. 2010;94:785–90.

Ultrasound and Ovarian Hyperstimulation Syndrome
Laura Proud Smith
2 3
Ultrasound in the Prediction of Ovarian Hyperstimulation Syndrome
Because ovarian hyperstimulation syndrome
(OHSS) is one of the most severe iatrogenic complications of in vitro fertilization (IVF), there have
been many attempts to predict which patients are
most at risk. Unfortunately, there are no perfectly
reliable tests which universally predict the development of OHSS. Ultrasound determination of
antral follicle count, counting the number of follicles developing in response to controlled ovarian hyperstimulation, sonographic evidence of
polycystic ovarian syndrome, assessment of ovarian volume, and Doppler fl ow studies of ovarian
vasculature have all been evaluated as markers to
identify a higher likelihood of developing OHSS.
Among the sonographic tools used in the prediction of OHSS, quantitation of the antral follicle
count (AFC) is one of the most accurate tests.
Antral follicles are 2–10 mm follicles which can be
identifi ed by ultrasound in the early follicular phase.
Antral follicles appear as round, sonolucent structures scattered throughout the ovary when viewed
by 2D transvaginal ultrasound (Fig. 23.1 ). The size
L. P. Smith , MD
Department of Reproductive Endocrinology and
Infertility, Reproductive Medicine and Surgery Center
of Virginia, P.L.C , 595 Martha Jefferson Drive,
Suite 390 , Charlottesville , VA 22902 , USA
e-mail: laura.smith@rmscva.com
of the antral follicle pool is considered to refl ect the
total number of remaining follicles [ 1 ]. Generally, a
low antral follicle count suggests a poor response to
ovarian stimulation and a high antral follicle count
suggests better ovarian response to gonadotropin
stimulation and higher oocyte yield.
Several investigators have evaluated AFC to
predict the development of OHSS. Kwee et al.
evaluated 110 patients with unexplained infertility, male factor, or cervical factor infertility,
counted antral follicles in all patients, and correlated the number of antral follicles with level of
ovarian response to IVF [ 2 ]. They categorized
ovarian response as poor, normal, and high and
then calculated the AFC cutoff which most accurately identifi ed each group. The AFC value of
>14 identifi ed hyper-responders with a sensitivity of 82 % and a specifi city of 89 %. Oncal et al.
also evaluated the predictive role of AFC in
OHSS in 41 women identifi ed to have moderate
to severe OHSS and 41 age-matched controls
who did not develop OHSS [ 3 ]. They found that
AFC had a moderate accuracy to predict the
development of OHSS. Using an AFC cutoff of
eight, much lower than the AFC cutoff used by
Kwee et al., they calculated 78 % sensitivity and
65 % specifi city. In a meta-analysis done by
Broer et al. investigating AFC as a predictor of
ovarian hyperstimulation, fi ve studies were identifi ed which met criteria for inclusion [ 4 ]. Two
reported on AFC alone, three reported on both
anti-Mullerian hormone (AMH) and AFC, and
all fi ve were prospective cohort studies. Among
the included studies, the defi nition of excessive
L.A. Stadtmauer, I. Tur-Kaspa (eds.), Ultrasound Imaging in Reproductive Medicine,
DOI 10.1007/978-1-4614-9182-8_23, © Springer Science+Business Media New York 2014
303

304
L.P. Smith
Fig. 23.1 Ovary with normal antral follicle count
ovarian response to IVF varied between ≥15 and
≥20 oocytes. Importantly, the number of oocytes
retrieved was used as a surrogate for risk of
OHSS; no study specifi cally identifi ed the
patients who met diagnostic criteria for OHSS.
When these fi ve studies of AFC were evaluated
together, the sensitivity of AFC to predict ovarian
hyper-response was seen to vary between 20 and
94 % depending on the AFC cutoff used, and the
specifi city varied between 33 and 98 %. From
these values, the authors calculated a sum estimate of the sensitivity to be 82 % and a sum estimate of the specifi city to be 80 %. Considering
this evidence, there is a clear association between
increased AFC and increased risk of OHSS.
Given the sensitivity and specifi city estimates of
AFC in the studies to date, if the AFC is found to
be greater than 14–16, caution should be executed in the initial gonadotropin dosing and
choice of stimulation protocol since there is
clearly increased risk of ovarian hyper-response
in such patients.
When proposing the use of AFC to predict
OHSS, it is important to be aware of the variability both in defi nition of antral follicle and operator technique in follicle counting [ 5 ]. Interestingly,
some authors adhere to the defi nition of antral
follicle as those follicles which are measured to
be 2–10 mm in the early follicular phase, as
above; but other authors limit that defi nition to
only those follicles which measure 2–5 mm. The
precise menstrual timing of the measurement of
AFC is also important. AFC should be performed
either between cycle day 2 and 4 or while on oral
contraceptive pills for greatest accuracy and
reproducibility.
The number of growing follicles in response
to gonadotropin stimulation during ART is
another sonographic test which has been proposed to predict the development of OHSS.
Clearly, there is a connection between the ovarian
response to stimulation and AFC, as patients with
higher baseline AFC would be expected to have a
more robust ovarian response to treatment.
Papanikolaou et al. sought to correlate the number of follicles ≥11 mm growing in response to
gonadotropin treatment during IVF with the likelihood of developing moderate or severe ovarian
hyperstimulation syndrome [ 6 ]. They evaluated
1,801 patients undergoing IVF treatment over a
2-year period. Factors such as peak estradiol
level and number of follicles ≥11 mm were correlated with the development of OHSS. In this
cohort, 53 patients were hospitalized because of
OHSS. They found that a threshold of ≥13 follicles measuring ≥11 mm was predictive of the
development of OHSS with a sensitivity of
85.5 % and a specifi city of 69 %. Interestingly,
the number of follicles ≥11 mm was a much better predictor of OHSS than the peak serum estradiol level, which had only a 53 % sensitivity and
77 % specifi city. Therefore, if it becomes apparent during an IVF cycle that there are 13 or more
follicles measuring ≥11 mm, the patient and physician should both be cognizant of the increased
risk of developing OHSS regardless of the serum
estradiol level.
Because patients who have higher baseline
AFC and higher functional ovarian response to
stimulation have been found to have a greater
likelihood of developing OHSS, it is important to
identify such patients early in clinical care. It is
well known that patients with polycystic ovarian
syndrome (PCOS) have by defi nition a high antral
follicle count and magnifi ed response to IVF.
Ultrasound assessment of ovarian morphology
serves as one of the key criteria for the diagnosis
of PCOS by the Rotterdam criteria [ 7 ]. The sono-
graphic fi ndings which meet Rotterdam diagnostic
criteria are either 12 or more follicles in each ovary
measuring 2–9 mm in diameter and/or increased
ovarian volume >10 mL [ 8 ] (Fig. 23.2 ). In com-
bination with either anovulation/oligo- ovulation
or clinical/biochemical hyperandrogenism and

23 Ultrasound and Ovarian Hyperstimulation Syndrome
305
Fig. 23.2 AFC of PCOS ovary in 2D ultrasound
having excluded other endocrine conditions such
as Cushing’s syndrome and congenital adrenal
hyperplasia, a patient could be diagnosed as having PCOS. Interestingly, even women who do not
technically meet criteria for PCOS but have isolated polycystic-appearing ovaries on ultrasound
have been found to have a higher risk of developing OHSS [ 7 ]. Therefore, clinical management
including gonadotropin dosing and choice of
stimulation protocol should incorporate knowledge of PCOS or polycystic-appearing ovaries on
ultrasound in an attempt to minimize the development of OHSS in these patients.
Using patients with PCOS as a model for other
patients at risk for OHSS, researchers have investigated ultrasound calculation of baseline ovarian
volume alone as a predictive marker. Danninger
et al. studied 101 patients undergoing IVF, all of
whom had 3D volumetric assessment of ovarian
volume starting on stimulation day 1 [ 9 ]. The
authors then remeasured ovarian volume on the
day of human chorionic gonadotropin (hCG) and
correlated those fi ndings with the development of
OHSS. They found a signifi cant correlation
between the baseline ovarian volume and OHSS
( p = 0.03) with a greater baseline ovarian volume
in women who subsequently developed OHSS
compared to those who did not. The authors estimated an ovarian volume cutoff of 10 mL as predictive of OHSS. Importantly, this sonographic
fi nding was not as robust as some of the other
markers already discussed. Even in the 34
patients identifi ed to have an ovarian volume
>10 mL, only 23.5 % ultimately developed
OHSS. Although it is logical in the context of
PCOS and the PCOS-associated risk of OHSS,
the measurement of ovarian volume is not considered to be a standard marker at this time to
predict OHSS.
The fi nal ultrasound characteristics which
have been used to attempt to predict the development of OHSS are Doppler fl ow studies of ovarian vasculature. The concept behind the
assessment of ovarian vascular resistance and
fl ow is that because OHSS involves third spacing
of fl uid secondary to increased vascular permeability, one might expect changes in ovarian vascular fl ow which may occur prior to clinical signs
or symptoms of OHSS and therefore could be
used to predict the development of OHSS [ 10 ].
Coupled with increased vascular permeability,
there is also abnormal intraovarian angiogenesis
in OHSS leading to low vascular impedance.
Multiple authors have investigated sonographic
characterization of ovarian vascular fl ow, resistance, peak systolic velocity, and pulse-wave
power Doppler to try to correlate vascular
chances with the likelihood of developing OHSS.
In 1997, Moohan et al. evaluated 30 patients who
were diagnosed with mild or severe OHSS within
2–15 days of oocyte retrieval [ 10 ]. All patients
underwent transabdominal ultrasound at the time
of diagnosis of OHSS with color Doppler done
on low-fl ow setting to characterize the fl ow
velocity waveforms within the ovarian vessels.
Vascular pulsatility index, resistance index, S-D
ratio, and maximal peak systolic velocity were
calculated. The authors found that in patients
with severe OHSS, there was markedly reduced
vascular impedance with a statistically signifi cantly higher resistance index in patients with
mild OHSS compared to severe (0.49 vs. 0.41,
p < 0.005). Surprisingly, there was no difference
in maximal peak systolic velocity, but pulsatility
index and S-D ratio also differed signifi cantly
between patients with mild and severe OHSS. Of
importance, this study evaluated only patients
diagnosed with OHSS. There was no comparison
with patients who did not develop OHSS, so it is
impossible to know if these differences in vascular fl ow could have been used to predict the
development of OHSS. Other authors including

306
L.P. Smith
Agrawal et al. did compare patients with OHSS
to controls and found a difference in ovarian stromal peak systolic velocity and time-averaged
maximal velocity between patients with and
without OHSS [ 11 ]. In the study by Agrawal
et al. published in 1998, ovarian Doppler fl ow
velocity was statistically signifi cantly higher in
patients with OHSS than controls, but pulsatility
index and resistance index did not differ between
the groups. The authors concluded that the
changes in fl ow velocity correlated with changes
in vascular endothelial growth factor (VEGF)
serum and follicular fl uid concentrations. More
recently, Jayaprakasan et al. used threedimensional (3D) power Doppler angiography to
attempt to predict OHSS [ 12 ]. In 118 patients, of
whom 18 developed moderate or severe OHSS,
ovarian vascular fl ow indices were quantifi ed by
3D ultrasound. Unexpectedly, there was no
difference in vascularization index, fl ow index,
or vascularization fl ow index between either
patients with OHSS vs. controls or the subgroups
of patients with moderate vs. severe OHSS.
Therefore, although the pathophysiology of
OHSS involves known changes in vascular permeability which logically suggest a connection
between Doppler measurements of ovarian vascular fl ow and the development of OHSS, unfortunately no studies to date have convincingly
shown that ultrasound measurement of ovarian
vascular parameters can be used to predict the
risk of OHSS.
In summary, ultrasound has been investigated
as a tool to predict the development of OHSS
through assessment of AFC, quantitation of follicular development during IVF, identifi cation of
polycystic-appearing ovaries or PCOS, determination of ovarian volume, and Doppler fl ow studies of ovarian vasculature. Of these potential
sonographic markers, AFC is the most signifi cant
predictor of the development of OHSS and
should be used to guide management. There is
also evidence linking the number of developing
follicles and the diagnosis of PCOS with the risk
of OHSS. To date, the other ultrasound tools
including ovarian volume and vascular fl ow analysis do not have clinical utility in the prediction
of OHSS.
Fig. 23.3 Hyperstimulated ovary after gonadotropin
therapy
Ultrasound in the Diagnosis of Ovarian Hyperstimulation Syndrome
Once OHSS is suspected on clinical grounds, the
diagnosis is aided by ultrasound fi ndings. OHSS is
categorized into mild, moderate, and severe disease. The differentiation involves sonographic features including the degree of ovarian enlargement,
presence and volume of abdominal ascites, presence or absence of pleural effusions, and Doppler
studies showing venous thromboembolism [ 13 ].
The clinical fi ndings of OHSS encompass a
spectrum ranging from mild disease, unpleasant
for the patient but not considered to be dangerous, to severe OHSS with signifi cant consequences and risk of death. Mild OHSS is common
and involves symptoms such as lower abdominal
or pelvic discomfort, gastrointestinal complaints
including nausea, emesis, and diarrhea, and some
degree of abdominal distention [ 14 ]. The process
of superovulation frequently leads to these mild
manifestations of OHSS, and up to a third of IVF
cycles may involve these complaints. The only
sonographic characteristic of mild OHSS may be
enlarged ovaries (5–12 cm) [ 15 ] (Fig. 23.3 ).
Moderate OHSS consists of intensifi ed pain,
nausea or emesis, enlarged ovaries seen on
ultrasound, and sonographic identifi cation of
abdominal or pelvic ascites with normal serum

23 Ultrasound and Ovarian Hyperstimulation Syndrome
Fig. 23.4 ( a ) Ultrasound
of moderate OHSS with
ascites. ( b ) Ultrasound
of ascites in the cul-de-sac
with severe OHSS
307
a
laboratory parameters (Fig. 23.4a ). Some authors
have described OHSS as an abdominal compartment syndrome because the rapid accumulation
of ascites can lead to increased intra-abdominal
pressure [ 16 ]. Increased intra-abdominal pres-
sure can become acute and lead to organ dysfunction. In severe forms, abdominal compartment
syndrome affects respiratory function, as in the
case of severe OHSS.
Given that abdominal ascites is a key characteristic of the diagnosis of moderate OHSS, it
is critical that the ultrasound fi ndings be interpreted correctly in the context of the clinical
presentation. Gunabushanam et al. reported the
case of a 22-year-old woman who had received
b
fertility treatments and presented to the emergency department complaining of a 12 h history of severe lower abdominal pain [ 17 ].
Transabdominal ultrasound showed enlarged
ovaries bilaterally (7 × 5 × 5 cm) with signifi cant
anechoic peritoneal free fl uid felt consistent with
ascites. She was diagnosed with OHSS. She
then began to clinically decompensate with the
development of pallor and peritoneal signs and
underwent diagnostic paracentesis notable for
non-clotting blood. Ultimately she was taken to
the operating room for emergent laparotomy and
a bleeding ovarian cyst was identifi ed and treated.
This case demonstrates the dangers of assuming
the diagnosis of OHSS in all patients undergoing

308
L.P. Smith
fertility treatments, as other pelvic pathology can
clearly lead to the accumulation of pelvic fl uid.
Cyst rupture can certainly lead to signifi cant
intraperitoneal bleeding with risk of death, and
accurate communication between the sonographer, Radiologist, Emergency Department physician, and Reproductive Endocrinologist is critical
to appropriate and timely diagnosis.
Severe OHSS is one of the most serious
complications of ovarian hyperstimulation
(Fig. 23.4b ). The incidence of severe OHSS is
estimated between 0.5 and 5 % per IVF cycle.
Severe OHSS has been reported to be fatal, so
the prompt diagnosis and treatment is paramount
[ 18 ]. Patients with severe OHSS describe rapid
weight gain, signifi cant abdominal distention
with inability to fi t into usual clothes, shortness
of breath, pain which can be refractory to oral
medications, oliguria, and severe and unrelenting nausea or emesis with inability to tolerate
oral intake. Clinical fi ndings include all of the
features of moderate OHSS plus clinical ascites,
sonographic ascites, ultrasound evidence of pleural effusions, and serum laboratory abnormalities
such as hemoconcentration, coagulopathy, electrolyte imbalance, and renal and hepatic dysfunction or failure [ 19 ].
Current research indicates that the fl uid shifts
which occur in OHSS are directly caused by
increased VEGF. VEGF leads to increased vascular permeability, reduced colloid osmotic gradient, and spillage of fl uid out of the vascular
compartment and into the extravascular spaces
[ 20 ]. These fl uid shifts can be identifi ed sono-
graphically, and it is recommended that in the
evaluation of the patient suspected to have moderate or severe OHSS, ultrasound should be used
to check for abdominal ascites or pleural effusions. Generally, the volume of accumulated fl uid
is not subtle and can easily be identifi ed either
through abdominal or vaginal ultrasound or ultrasound of the lung bases. The third spacing of fl uid
into the peritoneal and pleural cavities leads to
respiratory compromise, hypotension, increased
intra-abdominal pressure, and renal compromise
related to decreased perfusion [ 21 ].
The hemoconcentration and resultant hypercoagulability of severe OHSS can lead to venous
and arterial thromboembolism both in the typical locations such as lower extremities and lungs
and in sites which seem more specifi c to OHSS
such as the subclavian and internal jugular vessels. It is unclear why thrombosis may be localized to the neck rather than the lower extremities;
some have hypothesized that increased peritoneal fl uid containing infl ammatory mediators
drains into the thoracic duct and directly into the
subclavian veins, possibly locally increasing
coagulation at those sites [ 22 ]. Rova et al. evalu-
ated the risk of venous thromboembolism in all
IVF cycles and particularly in the subset complicated by OHSS [ 21 ]. They found that the
incidence of venous thromboembolism from the
time of the IVF cycle into the fi rst trimester of
pregnancy was 0.17 % (32 out of 19,194
patients), which was a 10-fold increase over the
background risk in spontaneous conceptions.
Furthermore, in patients diagnosed with OHSS,
the risk of venous thromboembolism was 1.4 %
(19/1,272), a 100-fold increase. Given this
markedly increased risk, Doppler studies to
evaluate for thromboembolism are a critical part
of the evaluation of the patient with suspected
moderate or severe OHSS. Even if thrombosis is
not identifi ed, it is generally recommended to
initiate prophylactic anticoagulation in hemoconcentrated patients with heparin or low
molecular weight heparin when the hematocrit
is found to be 45–50 % in order to mediate this
risk [ 23 ].
Ultrasound in the Management and Treatment of Ovarian Hyperstimulation Syndrome
Timely and accurate diagnosis of OHSS facilitates proactive management and treatment. The
management strategy varies in the literature,
from some authors recommending immediate
hospitalization upon the diagnosis of moderate or
severe OHSS to others advocating active outpatient treatment. Regardless of the location, ultrasound is critical in the management and treatment
of OHSS. Sonographic monitoring can determine
decrease in volume of abdominal ascites which
Соседние файлы в папке Библиотека им академика М.И. Перельмана
