Skip to main content Accessibility help
  • Print publication year: 2010
  • Online publication date: September 2011

Chapter 1 - The future of imaging and assisted reproduction

from Section 1: - Imaging techniques


1. RindfleischW.Darstellung des Cavum uteri. Klin Wochenschr 1910; 4: 780.
2. Tur-KaspaI, GalM, HartmanM, HartmanJ, HartmanA. A prospective evaluation of uterine abnormalities by saline infusion sonohysterography in 1,009 women with infertility or abnormal uterine bleeding. Fertil Steril 2006; 86: 1731–5.
3. KelekciS, KayaE, AlanE, AlanY, BilgeU, Mollamahmutoglu L. Comparison of transvaginal sonography, saline infusion sonography, and office hysteroscopy in reproductive-aged women with or without abnormal uterine bleeding. Fertil Steril 2005; 84: 682–6.
4. Perez-MedinaT, Bajo-ArenasJ, SalazarF, et al. Endometrial polyps and their implication in the pregnancy rates of patients undergoing intrauterine insemination: a prospective, randomized study. Hum Reprod 2005; 20: 1632–5.
5. LassA, WilliamsG, AbusheikhaN, BrinsdenP. The effect of endometrial polyps on outcomes of in vitro fertilization (IVF) cycles. J Assist Reprod Genet 1999; 16: 410–15.
6. UnterwegerM, GeyterCD, FröhlichFM, BongartzG, WiesnerW.Three-dimensional dynamic MR-hysterosalpingography; a new, low invasive, radiation-free and less painful radiological approach to female infertility. Hum Reprod 2002; 12: 3138–41.
7. CarrascosaM, BaronioM, CapuñayC, LópezEM, SueldoC, PapierS. Clinical use of 64-row multislice computed tomography hysterosalpingography in the evaluation of female factor infertility. Fertil Steril 2008; 90: 1953–8.
8. BaronioJM, CarrascosaP, UllaM, PapierS, BorghiM, SueldoC. Virtual hysterosalpingography:A novel painless technique for the study of the female reproductive tract in infertile patients. Fertil Steril 2006; 86: s51
9. SalimR, LeeC, DaviesA, JolaosoB, OfuasiaE, JurkovicD. A comparative study of three-dimensional saline infusion sonohysterography and diagnostic hysteroscopy for the classification of submucous fibroids. Hum Reprod 2005; 20: 253–7
10. DueholmM, LundorfE, HansenES, LedertougS, OlesenF. Accuracy of magnetic resonance imaging and transvaginal ultrasonography in the diagnosis, mapping, and measurement of uterine myomas. Am J Obstet Gynecol 2002; 186: 409–15
11. ImaokaI, WadaA, MatsuoM, YoshidaM, KitagakiH, SugimuraK. Imaging of disorders associated with female infertility: use in diagnosis, treatment, and management. RadioGraphics 2003; 23: 1401–21
12. StewartEA, RabinoviciJ, TempanyCM, et al. Clinical outcomes of focused ultrasound surgery for the treatment of uterine fibroids. Fertil Steril 2006; 85: 22–9.
13. RabinoviciJ, InbarY, EylonSC, SchiffE, HananelA, FreundlichD. Pregnancy and live birth after focused ultrasound surgery for symptomatic focal adenomyosis: a case report. Hum Reprod 2006; 21: 1255–9.
14. HanstedeMF, TempanyCM, StewartEA. Focused ultrasound surgery of intramural leiomyomas may facilitate fertility: A case report. Fertil Steril 2007; 88: 497.e5–7.
15. KunzG, BeilD, HuppertP, NoeM, KisslerS, LeyendeckerG. Adenomyosis in endometriosis – prevalence and impact on fertility. Evidence from magnetic resonance imaging. Hum Reprod 2005; 20: 2309–16.
16. AscherSM, ArnoldLL, PattRH, et al. Adenomyosis:prospective comparison of MR imaging and transvaginal sonography. Radiology 1994; 190: 803–6.
17. ReinholdC.Pelvic MR imaging in infertility and recurrent pregnancy loss. International Congress Series 2004; 1266: 401–8.
18. McWilliamsGD, FrattarelliJL.Changes in measured endometrial thickness predict in vitro fertilization success. Fertil Steril 2007; 88: 74–8.
19. LeviCS, LyonsEA, LindsayDJ. Early diagnosis of non-viable pregnancy with transvaginal ultrasound. Radiology. 167: 383–5.
20. Centers for Disease Control and Prevention, American Society for Reproductive Medicine, Society for Assisted Reproductive Technology. 2005 Assisted Reproductive Technology Success Rates: National Summary and Fertility Clinic Reports. Atlanta GA: Centers for Disease Control and Prevention; 2007.
21. The Rotterdam ESHRE/ASRM-sponsored PCOS consensus workshop group. Revised 2003 consensus on diagnostic criteria and longterm health risks related to polycystic ovary syndrome (PCOS). Hum Reprod 2004; 19: 41–7.
22. FrattarelliJL, Lauria-CostaDF, MillerBT, BerghPA, ScottRT.Basal antral follicle number and meanovarian diameter predict cycle cancellation and ovarian responsiveness in assisted reproductive technology cycles. Fertil Steril 2000; 74: 512–17.
23. FrattarelliJL, LeviAJ, MillerBT, SegarsJH. A prospective assessment of the predictive value of basal antral follicles in in vitro fertilization cycles. Fertil Steril 2003; 80: 350–5.
24. HendriksDJ, MolBJ, BancsiLF, VeldeDE, BroekmansFJ. Antral follicle count in the prediction of poor ovarian response and pregnancy after in vitro fertilization: a meta-analysis and comparison with basal follicle stimulating hormone level. Fertil Steril 2005; 83: 291–301.
25. CsokmayJM, FrattarelliJL.Basal ovarian cysts and clomiphene citrate ovulation induction cycles. Obstet Gynecol 2006; 107: 1292–6.
26. BaramkiTA.Hysterosalpingography. Fertil Steril 2005; 83: 1595–606.
27. ZeynelogluHB, AriciA, OliveDL. Adverse effects of hydrosalpinx on pregnancy rates after in vitro fertilization-embryo transfer. Fertil Steril 1998; 70: 492–9.
28. BayrakA, SaadatP, MorE, ChongL, PaulsonJP, SokolRZ. Pituitary imaging is indicated for the evaluation of hyperprolactinemia. Fertil Steril 2005; 84: 181–5.
29. KulkarniMV, LeeKF, McArdleCB, YeakleyJW, HaarFL. 1.5-T MR imaging of pituitary microadenomas: technical considerations and CT correlation. Am J Neuroradiol 1987; 9: 5–11.
30. ShawMS, HealyJC, ReznekRH. Imaging the peritoneum for malignant processes. Imaging. 2000; 12: 21–33.
31. BazotM, DaraiE, HouraniR, et al. Deep pelvic endometriosis: MR imaging for diagnosis and prediction of extension of disease. Radiology 2004; 232: 379–89.
32. BlakeMA, SinghA, SettyBN, et al. Pearls and pitfalls in interpretation of abdominal and pelvic PET-CT. RadioGraphics 2006; 26: 1335–53.