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-xm8r8 Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-07-02T14:44:33.976Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false

Chapter 26 - Ultrasound Monitoring for Ovulation Induction: Pitfalls and Problems

from Section 6 - Procedures before, during, and after Ovarian Stimulation

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  14 April 2022

By
Mona M. Aboulghar  and
Yomna Islam
Edited by
Mohamed Aboulghar  and
Botros Rizk
Mohamed Aboulghar
Affiliation:
University of Cairo IVF Centre
Botros Rizk
Affiliation:
University of South Alabama
Get access

Summary

Ovulation induction using stimulation drugs has now been in practice for over 40 years. Until the introduction of ultrasound, monitoring of follicular growth was a difficult task. Transvaginal ultrasound is now the routine for ovulation induction monitoring. Transvaginal probes have a much higher frequency reaching 4–9 MHz, and have wider angles up to 180º and depths that could reach 16 cm, facilitating the procedure of monitoring.

Type
Chapter
Information
Ovarian Stimulation , pp. 265 - 281
Publisher: Cambridge University Press
Print publication year: 2022

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

Stewart, EA, Cookson, CL, Gandolfo, RA, et al. Epidemiology of uterine fibroids: a systematic review. BJOG 2017;124(10):1501–1512.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Dueholm, M, Lundorf, E, Hansen, ES, et al. Accuracy of magnetic resonance imaging and transvaginal ultrasonography in the diagnosis, mapping, and measurement of uterine myomas. Am J Obstet Gynecol 2002;186(3):409–415.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Becker, E Jr., Lev-Toaff, AS, Kaufman, EP, et al. The added value of transvaginal sonohysterography over transvaginal sonography alone in women with known or suspected leiomyoma. J Ultrasound Med 2002;21:237–247.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Munro, MG, Critchley, HOD, Fraser, IS; FIGO Menstrual Disorders Committee. The two FIGO systems for normal and abnormal uterine bleeding symptoms and classification of causes of abnormal uterine bleeding in reproductive years: 2018 revisions. Int J Gynaecol Obstet 2018;143(3):393–408.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Sylvestre, C. A prospective study to evaluate the efficacy of two- and three-dimensional sonohysterography in women with intrauterine lesions. Fertil Steril 2003;79:1222–1225.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Van der Veen, F. Fibroids and IVF: retrospective studies or randomised clinical trials? BJOG 2017;124(4):622.Google Scholar
Rackow, BW, Taylor, HS. Submucosal uterine leiomyomas have a global effect on molecular determinants of endometrial receptivity. Fertil Steril 2010;93(6):2027–2034.Google Scholar
Wang, X, Chen, L, Wang, H, et al. The impact of noncavity-distorting intramural fibroids on the efficacy of in vitro fertilization-embryo transfer: an updated meta-analysis. Biomed Res Int 2018;2018:8924703.Google ScholarPubMed
Carranza-Mamane, B, Havelock, J, Hemmings, R. The management of uterine fibroids in women with otherwise unexplained infertility. J Obstet Gynaecol Can 2015;37(3):277–285.Google Scholar
Bazot, M, Cortez, A, Darai, E, et al. Ultrasonography compared with magnetic resonance imaging for the diagnosis of adenomyosis: correlation with histopathology. Hum Reprod 2001;16:2427–2433.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Van den Bosch, T, Dueholm, M, Leone, FPG, 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;46:284–298.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Vercellini, P, Consonni, D, Dridi, D, et al. Uterine adenomyosis and in vitro fertilization outcome: a systematic review and meta‐analysis. Hum Reprod 2014;29:964–77.Google Scholar
Mavrelos, D, Holland, TK, Khalaf, Y, et al. The impact of adenomyosis on the outcome of IVF-embryo transfer. Reprod Biomed Online 2017;35(5):549–554.Google Scholar
Younes, G, Tulandi, T. Effects of adenomyosis on in vitro fertilization treatment outcomes: a meta-analysis. Fertil Steril 2017;108(3):483.e3–490.e3.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Tsui, KH, Lee, FK, Seow, KM, et al. Conservative surgical treatment of adenomyosis to improve fertility: controversial values, indications, complications, and pregnancy outcomes. Taiwan J Obstet Gynecol 2015;54:635–640.Google Scholar
Chan, YY, Jayaprakasan, K, Zamora, J, et al. The prevalence of congenital uterine anomalies in unselected and high-risk populations: a systemic review. Hum Reprod Update 2011;17(6):761–771.Google Scholar
Grimbizis, GF, Gordts, S, Di Spiezio Sardo, A, et al. The ESHRE/ESGE consensus on the classification of female genital tract congenital anomalies. Hum Reprod 2013;28(8):2032–2044.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Corroenne, R, Legendre, G, May-Panloup, P, et al. Surgical treatment of septate uterus in cases of primary infertility and before assisted reproductive technologies. J Gynecol Obstet Hum Reprod 2018;47(9):413–418.Google Scholar
Rikken, JFW, Kowalik, CR, Emanuel, MH, et al. The randomised uterine septum transection trial (TRUST): design and protocol. BMC Womens Health 2018;18(1):163.Google Scholar
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;22:166–171.Google Scholar
La Sala, GB, Blasi, I, Gallinelli, A, et al. Diagnostic accuracy of sonohysterography and transvaginal sonography as compared with hysteroscopy and endometrial biopsy: a prospective study. Minerva Ginecol 2011;63(5):421–427.Google Scholar
Nieuwenhuis, LL, Hermans, FJ, Bij de Vaate, AJM, et al. Three-dimensional saline infusion sonography compared to two-dimensional saline infusion sonography for the diagnosis of focal intracavitary lesions. Cochrane Database Syst Rev 2017;5:CD011126.Google ScholarPubMed
Raine-Fenning, NJ. The interobserver reliability of ovarian volume measurement is improved with three dimensional ultrasound, but dependent upon technique. Ultrasound Med Biol 2003;29:1685–1690.Google Scholar
Coelho Neto, MA, Ludwin, A, Borrell, A, et al. Counting ovarian antral follicles by ultrasound: a practical guide. Ultrasound Obstet Gynecol 2018;51(1):10–20.Google Scholar
Raine-Fenning, N, Jayaprakasan, K, Clewes, J, et al. SonoAVC: a novel method of automatic volume calculation. Ultrasound Obstet Gynecol 2008;31:691–696.Google Scholar
Peres Fagundes, PA, Chapon, R, Olsen, PR, et al. Evaluation of three-dimensional SonoAVC ultrasound for antral follicle count in infertile women: its agreement with conventional two-dimensional ultrasound and serum levels of anti-Müllerian hormone. Reprod Biol Endocrinol 2017;15(1):96.Google Scholar
Lee, Y, Kim, TH, Park, JK, et al. Predictive value of antral follicle count and serum anti-Müllerian hormone: which is better for live birth prediction in patients aged over 40 with their first IVF treatment? Eur J Obstet Gynecol Reprod Biol 2018;221:151–155.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Mutlu, MF, Erdem, M, Erdem, A, et al. Antral follicle count determines poor ovarian response better than anti-Müllerian hormone but age is the only predictor for live birth in in vitro fertilization cycles. J Assist Reprod Genet 2013;30(5):657–665.Google Scholar
Ashrafi, M, Hemat, M, Arabipoor, A, et al. Predictive values of anti-müllerian hormone, antral follicle count and ovarian response prediction index (ORPI) for assisted reproductive technology outcomes. J Obstet Gynaecol 2017;37(1):82–88.Google Scholar
International evidence-based guideline for the assessment and management of polycystic ovary syndrome 2018. ESHRE guidelines.Google Scholar
Timmerman, D, Valentin, L, Bourne, TH, et al., International Ovarian Tumor Analysis (IOTA) Group. 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;16:500–505.Google Scholar
Sokalska, A, Timmerman, D, Testa, AC, et al. Diagnostic accuracy of transvaginal ultrasound examination for assigning a specific diagnosis to adnexal masses. Ultrasound Obstet Gynecol 2009;34:462–470.Google Scholar
Guerriero, S, Ajossa, S, Garau, N, et al. Diagnosis of pelvic adhesions in patients with endometrioma: the role of transvaginal ultrasonography. Fertil Steril 2009;94:742–746.Google Scholar
Gürel, H, Gürel, SA. Ovarian cystic teratoma with a pathognomonic appearance of multiple floating balls: a case report and investigation of common characteristics of the cases in the literature. Fertil Steril 2008;90:2008.e17–2008.e19.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Eryılmaz, OG, Sarıkaya, E, Aksakal, FN, et al. Ovarian cyst formation following gonadotropin-releasing hormone-agonist administration decreases the oocyte quality in IVF cycles. Balkan Med J 2012;29(2):197–200.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Jain, KA. Sonographic spectrum of hemorrhagic ovarian cysts. J Ultrasound Med 2002;21:879–886.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Geomini, PM, Coppus, SF, Kluivers, KB, et al. Is three-dimensional ultrasonography of additional value in the assessment of adnexal masses? Gynecol Oncol 2007;106:153–159.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;29:215–225.Google Scholar
Strandell, A, Lindhard, A, Waldenström, U, Thorburn, J. Hydrosalpinx and IVF outcome: cumulative results after salpingectomy in a randomized controlled trial. Hum Reprod 2001;16:2403–2410.Google Scholar
Xu, B, Zhang, Q, Zhao, J, et al. Pregnancy outcome of in vitro fertilization after Essure and laparoscopic management of hydrosalpinx: a systematic review and meta-analysis. Fertil Steril 2017;108(1):84.e5–95.e5.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Amer, A. Three-dimensional versus two-dimensional ultrasound measurement of follicular volume: are they comparable? Arch Gynecol Obstet 2003;268:155–157.Google Scholar
Wertheimer, A, Nagar, R, Oron, G, et al. Fertility treatment outcomes after follicle tracking with standard 2-dimensional sonography versus 3-dimensional sonography-based automated volume count: prospective study. J Ultrasound Med 2018;37(4):859–866.Google Scholar
Vural, F, Vural, B, Doğer, E, et al. Perifollicular blood flow and its relationship with endometrial vascularity, follicular fluid EG-VEGF, IGF-1, and inhibin-a levels and IVF outcomes. J Assist Reprod Genet 2016; 33(10):1355–1362.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Huyghe, S, Verest, A, Thijssen, A, et al. The prognostic value of perifollicular blood flow in the outcome after assisted reproduction: a systematic review. Facts Views Vis Obgyn 2017;9(3):153–156.Google ScholarPubMed
Kim, A, Jung, H, Choi, WJ, et al. Detection of endometrial and subendometrial vasculature on the day of embryo transfer and prediction of pregnancy during fresh in vitro fertilization cycles. Taiwan J Obstet Gynecol 2014;53(3):360–365.Google Scholar
Zhang, T, He, Y, Wang, Y, et al. The role of three-dimensional power Doppler ultrasound parameters measured on hCG day in the prediction of pregnancy during in vitro fertilization treatment. Eur J Obstet Gynecol Reprod Biol 2016;203:66–71.CrossRefGoogle 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
×