Skip to main content Accessibility help

We use cookies to distinguish you from other users and to provide you with a better experience on our websites. Close this message to accept cookies or find out how to manage your cookie settings.

Close cookie message
×
Hostname: page-component-848d4c4894-xfwgj Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-07-01T05:41:57.587Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false

Chapter 16 - Doppler Ultrasound in Gynaecology

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  28 February 2020

Kanna Jayaprakasan ,
Lukasz Polanski  and
Kamal Ojha
By
Ligita Jokubkiene ,
Victor P. Campos ,
Walter C. Borges  and
Wellington P. Martins
Kanna Jayaprakasan
Affiliation:
Department of Maternity and Gynaecology, Royal Derby Hospital, Derby
Lukasz Polanski
Affiliation:
Assisted Conception Unit, Guy’s Hospital, London
Kamal Ojha
Affiliation:
Department of Obstetrics and Gynecology, St George's University Hospital, London
Get access

Summary

Doppler ultrasound imaging can be used to identify and assess blood vessels by producing a colour-coded map of Doppler shifts superimposed on a B-mode ultrasound image. The effect, first described by the Austrian scientist Christian Doppler in the middle of the nineteenth century, has been used to provide information regarding blood flow in ultrasound’s daily practice in the last five to six decades. Blood flow in arteries and veins can be recorded from the surface of the skin, allowing flow analysis in systole and diastole, in both normal and diseased blood vessels. Over time, Doppler techniques became an important technique in diagnostic ultrasound for haemodynamic assessment, replacing some invasive procedures in many clinical situations.

Type
Chapter
Information
Gynaecological Ultrasound Scanning
Tips and Tricks
 , pp. 219 - 230
Publisher: Cambridge University Press
Print publication year: 2020

Access options

Get access to the full version of this content by using one of the access options below. (Log in options will check for institutional or personal access. Content may require purchase if you do not have access.)

References

Bhide, A, Acharya, G, Bilardo, CM, et al. ISUOG practice guidelines: use of Doppler ultrasonography in obstetrics. Ultrasound Obstet Gynecol 2013;41:233–9.Google ScholarPubMed
Naguib, NN, Nour-Eldin, NE, Serag-Eldin, F, et al. Role of uterine artery Doppler in the management of uterine leiomyoma by arterial embolization. Ultrasound Obstet Gynecol 2012;40:452–8.Google Scholar
Zannoni, L, Savelli, L, Jokubkiene, L, et al. Intra- and interobserver reproducibility of assessment of Doppler ultrasound findings in adnexal masses. Ultrasound Obstet Gynecol 2013;42:93–101.Google Scholar
Collins, SL, Stevenson, GN, Noble, JA, Impey, L, Welsh, AW. Influence of power Doppler gain setting on Virtual Organ Computer-aided AnaLysis indices in vivo: can use of the individual sub-noise gain level optimize information? Ultrasound Obstet Gynecol 2012;40:75–80.Google Scholar
Jokubkiene, L, Sladkevicius, P, Rovas, L, Valentin, L. Assessment of changes in endometrial and subendometrial volume and vascularity during the normal menstrual cycle using three-dimensional power Doppler ultrasound. Ultrasound Obstet Gynecol 2006;27:672–9.Google Scholar
Raine-Fenning, NJ, Campbell, BK, Kendall, NR, Clewes, JS, Johnson, IR. Quantifying the changes in endometrial vascularity throughout the normal menstrual cycle with three-dimensional power Doppler angiography. Hum Reprod 2004;19:330–8.Google Scholar
Jokubkiene, L, Sladkevicius, P, Valentin, L. Transvaginal ultrasound examination of the endometrium in postmenopausal women without vaginal bleeding. Ultrasound Obstet Gynecol 2016;48:390–6.Google Scholar
Groszmann, YS, Benacerraf, BR. Complete evaluation of anatomy and morphology of the infertile patient in a single visit; the modern infertility pelvic ultrasound examination. Fertil Steril 2016;105:1381–93.Google Scholar
Ludwin, I, Martins, WP, Nastri, CO, Ludwin, A. Pain intensity during ultrasound assessment of uterine cavity and tubal patency with and without painkillers: prospective observational study. J Minim Invasive Gynecol 2017;24:599–608.Google Scholar
Ludwin, A, Nastri, CO, Ludwin, I, Martins, WP. Hysterosalpingo-lidocaine-foam sonography combined with power Doppler imaging (HyLiFoSy-PD) in tubal patency assessment: ‘flaming tube’ sign. Ultrasound Obstet Gynecol 2017;50:808–10.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Ludwin, I, Ludwin, A, Nastri, CO, et al. Inter-rater reliability of air/saline HyCoSy, HyFoSy and HyFoSy combined with power Doppler for screening tubal patency. Ultraschall Med 2019; 40;47–54.Google Scholar
Khan, MS, Shaikh, A, Ratnani, R. Ultrasonography and Doppler study to predict uterine receptivity in infertile patients undergoing embryo transfer. J Obstet Gynaecol India 2016;66:377–82.Google Scholar
Koo, HS, Park, CW, Cha, SH, Yang, KM. Serial evaluation of endometrial blood flow for prediction of pregnancy outcomes in patients who underwent controlled ovarian hyperstimulation and in vitro fertilization and embryo transfer. J Ultrasound Med 2018;37:851–7.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Wang, J, Xia, F, Zhou, Y, et al. Association between endometrial/subendometrial vasculature and embryo transfer outcome: a meta-analysis and subgroup analysis. J Ultrasound Med 2018;37:149–63.Google Scholar
Polanski, LT, Baumgarten, MN, Brosens, J, et al. Endometrial spatio-temporal image correlation (STIC) and prediction of outcome following assisted reproductive treatment. Eur J Obstet Gynecol Reprod Biol 2016;203:320–5.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Nandi, A, Martins, WP, Jayaprakasan, K, et al. Assessment of endometrial and subendometrial blood flow in women undergoing frozen embryo transfer cycles. Reprod Biomed Online 2014;28:343–51.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Hoozemans, DA, Schats, R, Lambalk, NB, Homburg, R, Hompes, PG. Serial uterine artery Doppler velocity parameters and human uterine receptivity in IVF/ICSI cycles. Ultrasound Obstet Gynecol 2008;31:432–8.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Martins, WP, Welsh, AW, Lima, JC, Nastri, CO, Raine-Fenning, NJ. The ‘volumetric’ pulsatility index as evaluated by spatiotemporal imaging correlation (STIC): a preliminary description of a novel technique, its application to the endometrium and an evaluation of its reproducibility. Ultrasound Med Biol 2011;37:2160–8.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Nastri, CO, Ferriani, RA, Raine-Fenning, N, Martins, WP. Endometrial scratching performed in the non-transfer cycle and outcome of assisted reproduction: a randomized controlled trial. Ultrasound Obstet Gynecol 2013;42:375–82.Google ScholarPubMed
El-Sharkawy, M, El-Mazny, A, Ramadan, W, et al. Three-dimensional ultrasonography and power Doppler for discrimination between benign and malignant endometrium in premenopausal women with abnormal uterine bleeding. BMC Women’s Health 2016;16:18.Google Scholar
Sladkevicius, P, Opolskiene, G, Valentin, L. Prospective temporal validation of mathematical models to calculate risk of endometrial malignancy in patients with postmenopausal bleeding. Ultrasound Obstet Gynecol 2017;49:649–56.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Lacey, JV, Jr., Sherman, ME, Rush, BB, et al. Absolute risk of endometrial carcinoma during 20-year follow-up among women with endometrial hyperplasia. J Clin Oncol 2010;28:788–92.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Van den Bosch, T, Van Schoubroeck, D, Ameye, L, et al. Ultrasound assessment of endometrial thickness and endometrial polyps in women on hormonal replacement therapy. Am J Obstet Gynecol 2003;188:1249–53.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Lee, SC, Kaunitz, AM, Sanchez-Ramos, L, Rhatigan, RM. The oncogenic potential of endometrial polyps: a systematic review and meta-analysis. Obstet Gynecol 2010;116:1197–205.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Timmerman, D, Verguts, J, Konstantinovic, ML, et al. The pedicle artery sign based on sonography with color Doppler imaging can replace second-stage tests in women with abnormal vaginal bleeding. Ultrasound Obstet Gynecol 2003;22:166–71.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
McLucas, B. Diagnosis imaging and anatomical classification of uterine fibroids. Best Pract Res Clin Obstet Gynaecol 2008;22:627–42.Google Scholar
Epstein, E, Valentin, L. Gray-scale ultrasound morphology in the presence or absence of intrauterine fluid and vascularity as assessed by color Doppler for discrimination between benign and malignant endometrium in women with postmenopausal bleeding. Ultrasound Obstet Gynecol 2006;28:89–95.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Van den Bosch, T, Dueholm, M, Leone, FP, et al. Terms, definitions and measurements to describe sonographic features of myometrium and uterine masses: a consensus opinion from the Morphological Uterus Sonographic Assessment (MUSA) group. Ultrasound Obstet Gynecol 2015;46:284–98.Google Scholar
Van den Bosch, T, de Bruijn, AM, de Leeuw, RA, et al. Sonographic classification and reporting system for diagnosing adenomyosis. Ultrasound Obstet Gynecol 2019;53:576–82.Google Scholar
Munro, MG, Critchley, HO, Broder, MS, Fraser, IS. FIGO classification system (PALM-COEIN) for causes of abnormal uterine bleeding in nongravid women of reproductive age. Int J Gynaecol Obstet 2011;113:3–13.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Epstein, E, Skoog, L, Isberg, PE, et al. An algorithm including results of gray-scale and power Doppler ultrasound examination to predict endometrial malignancy in women with postmenopausal bleeding. Ultrasound Obstet Gynecol 2002;20:370–6.Google Scholar
Opolskiene, G, Sladkevicius, P, Valentin, L. Ultrasound assessment of endometrial morphology and vascularity to predict endometrial malignancy in women with postmenopausal bleeding and sonographic endometrial thickness >or= 4.5 mm. Ultrasound Obstet Gynecol 2007;30:332–40.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Opolskiene, G, Sladkevicius, P, Valentin, L. Prediction of endometrial malignancy in women with postmenopausal bleeding and sonographic endometrial thickness >/= 4.5 mm. Ultrasound Obstet Gynecol 2011;37:232–40.Google Scholar
Exacoustos, C, Romanini, ME, Amadio, A, et al. Can gray-scale and color Doppler sonography differentiate between uterine leiomyosarcoma and leiomyoma? J Clin Ultrasound 2007;35:449–57.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Aviram, R, Ochshorn, Y, Markovitch, O, et al. Uterine sarcomas versus leiomyomas: gray-scale and Doppler sonographic findings. J Clin Ultrasound 2005;33:10–13.Google Scholar
Richards, JS. Maturation of ovarian follicles: actions and interactions of pituitary and ovarian hormones on follicular cell differentiation. Physiol Rev 1980;60:51–89.Google Scholar
Zeleznik, AJ, Schuler, HM, Reichert, LE, Jr. Gonadotropin-binding sites in the rhesus monkey ovary: role of the vasculature in the selective distribution of human chorionic gonadotropin to the preovulatory follicle. Endocrinology 1981;109:356–62.Google Scholar
Jokubkiene, L, Sladkevicius, P, Rovas, L, Valentin, L. Assessment of changes in volume and vascularity of the ovaries during the normal menstrual cycle using three-dimensional power Doppler ultrasound. Hum Reprod 2006;21:2661–8.Google Scholar
Brezinka, C. 3D ultrasound imaging of the human corpus luteum. Reprod Biol 2014;14:110–14.Google Scholar
Baerwald, AR, Adams, GP, Pierson, RA. Form and function of the corpus luteum during the human menstrual cycle. Ultrasound Obstet Gynecol 2005;25:498–507.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Tamura, H, Takasaki, A, Taniguchi, K, et al. Changes in blood-flow impedance of the human corpus luteum throughout the luteal phase and during early pregnancy. Fertil Steril 2008;90:2334–9.Google Scholar
Miyazaki, T, Tanaka, M, Miyakoshi, K, et al. Power and colour Doppler ultrasonography for the evaluation of the vasculature of the human corpus luteum. Hum Reprod 1998;13:2836–41.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Valentin, L, Sladkevicius, P, Laurini, R, Soderberg, H, Marsal, K. Uteroplacental and luteal circulation in normal first-trimester pregnancies: Doppler ultrasonographic and morphologic study. Am J Obstet Gynecol 1996;174:768–75.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Dal, J, Vural, B, Caliskan, E, Ozkan, S, Yucesoy, I. Power Doppler ultrasound studies of ovarian, uterine, and endometrial blood flow in regularly menstruating women with respect to luteal phase defects. Fertil Steril 2005;84:224–7.Google Scholar
Sladkevicius, P, Valentin, L, Marsal, K. Transvaginal gray-scale and Doppler ultrasound examinations of the uterus and ovaries in healthy postmenopausal women. Ultrasound Obstet Gynecol 1995;6:81–90.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Folkman, J. Tumor angiogenesis. Adv Cancer Res 1985;43:175–203.Google Scholar
Timmerman, D, Valentin, L, Bourne, TH, et al. Terms, definitions and measurements to describe the sonographic features of adnexal tumors: a consensus opinion from the International Ovarian Tumor Analysis (IOTA) Group. Ultrasound Obstet Gynecol 2000;16:500–5.Google Scholar
Jokubkiene, L, Sladkevicius, P, Valentin, L. Does three-dimensional power Doppler ultrasound help in discrimination between benign and malignant ovarian masses? Ultrasound Obstet Gynecol 2007;29:215–25.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Valentin, L. Pattern recognition of pelvic masses by gray-scale ultrasound imaging: the contribution of Doppler ultrasound. Ultrasound Obstet Gynecol 1999;14:338–47.Google ScholarPubMed
Valentin, L, Hagen, B, Tingulstad, S, Eik-Nes, S. Comparison of ‘pattern recognition’ and logistic regression models for discrimination between benign and malignant pelvic masses: a prospective cross validation. Ultrasound Obstet Gynecol 2001;18:357–65.Google Scholar
Guerriero, S, Van Calster, B, Somigliana, E, et al. Age-related differences in the sonographic characteristics of endometriomas. Hum Reprod 2016;31:1723–31.Google Scholar
Van Holsbeke, C, Van Calster, B, Guerriero, S, et al. Endometriomas: their ultrasound characteristics. Ultrasound Obstet Gynecol 2010;35:730–40.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Guerriero, S, Ajossa, S, Mais, V, et al. The diagnosis of endometriomas using colour Doppler energy imaging. Hum Reprod 1998;13:1691–5.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Woo, YL, Kyrgiou, M, Bryant, A, Everett, T, Dickinson, HO. Centralisation of services for gynaecological cancer. Cochrane Database Syst Rev 2012;2012:CD007945.Google Scholar
Valentin, L, Ameye, L, Jurkovic, D, et al. Which extrauterine pelvic masses are difficult to correctly classify as benign or malignant on the basis of ultrasound findings and is there a way of making a correct diagnosis? Ultrasound Obstet Gynecol 2006;27:438–44.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Timmerman, D, Schwarzler, P, Collins, WP, et al. Subjective assessment of adnexal masses with the use of ultrasonography: an analysis of interobserver variability and experience. Ultrasound Obstet Gynecol 1999;13:11–16.Google Scholar
Kaijser, J, Sayasneh, A, Van Hoorde, K, et al. Presurgical diagnosis of adnexal tumours using mathematical models and scoring systems: a systematic review and meta-analysis. Hum Reprod Update 2014;20:449–62.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Timmerman, D, Testa, AC, Bourne, T, et al. Simple ultrasound-based rules for the diagnosis of ovarian cancer. Ultrasound Obstet Gynecol 2008;31:681–90.Google Scholar
Timmerman, D, Van Calster, B, Testa, A, et al. Predicting the risk of malignancy in adnexal masses based on the Simple Rules from the International Ovarian Tumor Analysis group. Am J Obstet Gynecol 2016;214:424–37.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Testa, AC, Mancari, R, Di Legge, A, et al. The ‘lead vessel’: a vascular ultrasound feature of metastasis in the ovaries. Ultrasound Obstet Gynecol 2008;31:218–21.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Pepe, F, Pepe, P. Color Doppler ultrasound (CDU) in the diagnosis of obstructive hydronephrosis in pregnant women. Arch Gynecol Obstet 2013;288:489–93.Google Scholar
Thonnon, C, Philip, CA, Fassi-Fehri, H, et al. Three-dimensional ultrasound in the management of bladder endometriosis. J Minim Invasive Gynecol 2015;22:403–9.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Labropoulos, N, Jasinski, PT, Adrahtas, D, Gasparis, AP, Meissner, MH. A standardized ultrasound approach to pelvic congestion syndrome. Phlebology 2017;32:608–19.Google Scholar
Malgor, RD, Adrahtas, D, Spentzouris, G, et al. The role of duplex ultrasound in the workup of pelvic congestion syndrome. J Vasc Surg Venous Lymphat Disord 2014;2:34–8.Google Scholar
Guerriero, S, Ajossa, S, Lai, MP, et al. Transvaginal ultrasonography associated with colour Doppler energy in the diagnosis of hydrosalpinx. Hum Reprod 2000;15:1568–72.Google Scholar

Save book to Kindle

To save this book to your Kindle, first ensure coreplatform@cambridge.org is added to your Approved Personal Document E-mail List under your Personal Document Settings on the Manage Your Content and Devices page of your Amazon account. Then enter the ‘name’ part of your Kindle email address below. Find out more about saving to your Kindle.

Note you can select to save to either the @free.kindle.com or @kindle.com variations. ‘@free.kindle.com’ emails are free but can only be saved to your device when it is connected to wi-fi. ‘@kindle.com’ emails can be delivered even when you are not connected to wi-fi, but note that service fees apply.

Find out more about the Kindle Personal Document Service.

Available formats
×

Save book to Dropbox

To save content items to your account, please confirm that you agree to abide by our usage policies. If this is the first time you use this feature, you will be asked to authorise Cambridge Core to connect with your account. Find out more about saving content to Dropbox.

Available formats
×

Save book to Google Drive

To save content items to your account, please confirm that you agree to abide by our usage policies. If this is the first time you use this feature, you will be asked to authorise Cambridge Core to connect with your account. Find out more about saving content to Google Drive.

Available formats
×