Increased uterine artery resistance in the third trimester of pregnancy could be used to predict postpartum maternal complications.

The use of prophylactic dose of calheparin and aspirin is associated with increased chance of passing 1st trimester safely regardless the age, body mass index or number of abortion in women with unexplained recurrent spontaneous abortion.

BackgroundUltrasonography has been extensively used in women suspected of having a gynecological malignancy. The aim of this study is to evaluate the efficacy of 3D ultrasonography and power Doppler for discrimination between benign and malignant endometrium in premenopausal women with abnormal uterine bleeding.MethodsThis cross-sectional study included 78 premenopausal women with abnormal uterine bleeding scheduled for hysteroscopy and endometrial curettage. The endometrial thickness (ET), uterine artery pulsatility index (PI) and resistance index (RI), and endometrial volume (EV) and 3D power Doppler vascularization index (VI), flow index (FI), and vascularization flow index (VFI) were measured and compared with hysteroscopic and histopathologic findings.ResultsThe ET (P <0.001), EV (P <0.001), and endometrial VI (P <0.001) and VFI (P = 0.043) were significantly increased in patients with atypical endometrial hyperplasia and endometrial carcinoma (n = 10) than those with benign endometrium (n = 68); whereas, the uterine artery PI and RI and endometrial FI were not significantly different between the two groups. The best marker for discrimination between benign and malignant endometrium was the VI with an area under the ROC curve of 0.88 at a cutoff value of 0.81 %.Conclusion3D ultrasonography and power Doppler, especially endometrial VI, may be useful for discrimination between benign and malignant endometrium in premenopausal women with abnormal uterine bleeding.

No abstract

Objective: to investigate the accuracy of 2D and 3D ultrasound in measurement of Cesarean section (CS) scar thickness. Study design: A prospective observational study conducted on 75 pregnant women with previous 1 or 2 CS candidates for elective CS. Evaluation of LUS using 2D and 3D transabdominal and transvaginal ultrasound is then correlated to scar integrity assessed intraoperatively. Results: Five cases had scar dehiscence with incidence of 6.67%. Dehiscence showed a statistically significant difference between women with previous 2 CS and those with previous 1 CS (4 vs. 1 respectively). The best cut-off value for 2D and 3D transabdominal ultrasound was 3.8 and 5.0 mm, with AUC of 0.737and 0.824, yielding a sensitivity of 60% and 100%, specificity of 91.4% and 62.86% respectively .The best cut-off value for 2D and 3D transvaginal ultrasound was 2.0 and 1.9 mm with AUC of 0.931 and 0.974 with sensitivity of 100% and 100%, specificity of 65.71% and 87.14% respectively. Conclusion: ultrasound is a reliable method for measuring the LUS thickness and scar integrity in patients with previous CS. The use of transvaginal 3D ultrasound in measuring the muscular layer thickness of LUS is the most reliable route with high sensitivity and specificity.