The site of the Media Sphera Publishers contains materials intended solely for healthcare professionals.
By closing this message, you confirm that you are a certified medical professional or a student of a medical educational institution.

Login
EN
+7 (495) 482-4118
+7 (495) 482-0604
+8 800 250-18-12
  • (toll-free number for subscriptions)
    Mon-Fri from 10 a.m. to 6 p.m.

  • © 1998-2025
+7 (495) 482-43-29
EN
All journals
Journal
Year
Year
Search result: 0

Arakelyan A.S.

National Medical Research Center for Obstetrics, Gynecology and Perinatology named after Academician V.I. Kulakov of the Ministry of Healthcare of Russia

Gus A.I.

National Medical Research Center for Obstetrics, Gynecology and Perinatology named after Academician V.I. Kulakov of the Ministry of Healthcare of Russian Federation

Adamyan L.V.

Moscow State Medical and Dental University named after A.I. Evdokimov

Popryadukhin A.Yu.

Kulakov National Medical Research Center of Obstetrics, Gynecology and Perinatology

Boykova Yu.V.

V.I. Kulakov National Medical Research Center of Obstetrics, Gynecology and Perinatology

The role of 3D echographic diagnostics in the choice of tactics for reconstructive plastic surgery in case of abnormalities of the development of the uterus and vagina

Authors:

Arakelyan A.S., Gus A.I., Adamyan L.V., Popryadukhin A.Yu., Boykova Yu.V.

More about the authors

Journal: Russian Journal of Human Reproduction. 2021;27(4): 32‑42

DOI: 10.17116/repro20212704132

Read: 2422 times

Download PDF (RU)
Contact the author
Table of contents

THE ROLE OF 3D ECHOGRAPHIC DIAGNOSTICS IN THE CHOICE OF TACTICS FOR RECONSTRUCTIVE PLASTIC SURGERY IN CASE OF ABNORMALITIES OF THE DEVELOPMENT OF THE UTERUS AND VAGINA
THE ROLE OF 3D ECHOGRAPHIC DIAGNOSTICS IN THE CHOICE OF TACTICS FOR RECONSTRUCTIVE PLASTIC SURGERY IN CASE OF ABNORMALITIES OF THE DEVELOPMENT OF THE UTERUS AND VAGINA

To cite this article:

Arakelyan AS, Gus AI, Adamyan LV, Popryadukhin AYu, Boykova YuV. The role of 3D echographic diagnostics in the choice of tactics for reconstructive plastic surgery in case of abnormalities of the development of the uterus and vagina. Russian Journal of Human Reproduction. 2021;27(4):32‑42. (In Russ.)
https://doi.org/10.17116/repro20212704132

 
Подписка 2026 Проблемы репродукции (Russian Journal of Human Reproduction)
 
МСФ на ЯМ
Использование инфографики авторами научных работ
Close metadata
Recommended articles:
Pote­ntial of ultrasonography in dete­rmination of orbi­tal inflammation acti­vity in granulomatosis with polya­ngiitis. Russian Annals of Ophthalmology. 2024;(6):32-38
Pulmonary arte­rial hype­rtension in diso­rders of porto-caval hemo­dynamics. The role of ultrasound diagnostics. Russian Cardiology Bulletin. 2025;(1):90-98
Abstract:

OBJECTIVE

To optimize the surgical approaches for verification of different variants of Müllerian duct anomalies and carry out a comparative assessment of the diagnostic value of 2D/3D imaging in order to improve reproductive outcomes.

MATERIAL AND METHODS

The study included 1567 women of reproductive age, who were diagnosed with a malformation of the uterus and vagina using 2D/3D ultrasound at their initial stage of evaluation.

RESULTS

The 3D reconstruction of visualization allowed us to reveal the following developmental anomalies of the uterus: among 1567 cases there were 161 cases with aplasia of the uterus and vagina, 27 with aplasia of the vagina with a functioning uterus, 45 with a two-horned uterus, 79 with a one-horned uterus, 179 with doubling of the uterus and vagina, 55 — with doubling of the uterus and vagina with partial aplasia of one vagina, 968 — with an intrauterine septum, 30 — with a saddle uterus, 23 observations — with a T-shaped uterus.

CONCLUSIONS

Significant diagnostic advantages of the volumetric reconstruction (3D scanning) over two-dimensional echography dictate us the need for its widespread implementation at the preoperative stage for selection of the optimal surgical tactics in dealing with uterine anomalies.

Keywords:

ultrasound diagnostics
malformations of the uterus and vagina
Müllerian anomalies ducts

Authors:

Arakelyan A.S.

National Medical Research Center for Obstetrics, Gynecology and Perinatology named after Academician V.I. Kulakov of the Ministry of Healthcare of Russia

Gus A.I.

National Medical Research Center for Obstetrics, Gynecology and Perinatology named after Academician V.I. Kulakov of the Ministry of Healthcare of Russian Federation

Adamyan L.V.

Moscow State Medical and Dental University named after A.I. Evdokimov

Popryadukhin A.Yu.

Kulakov National Medical Research Center of Obstetrics, Gynecology and Perinatology

Boykova Yu.V.

V.I. Kulakov National Medical Research Center of Obstetrics, Gynecology and Perinatology

Received:

20.05.2021

Accepted:

23.06.2021

Close metadata

References:

  1. Mikheeva NG, Mikhalevich SI, Yakutovskaya SL, Markovskaya TV. Modern approaches to ultrasound diagnostics of uterine malformations. Meditsinskie novosti. 2012;3:19-23. (In Russ.).
  2. Arakelyan AS, Popryadukhin AYu, Karapetyan EA. Genetic factors in the development of the Mayer-Rokitansky-Küster-Hauser syndrome (aplasia of the uterus and vagina). Problemy Reproduktsii. 2020;26(5):43-50. (In Russ.). https://doi. org/10.17116/repro20202605143
  3. Raga F, Bauset C, Remochi J, Bonilla-Musoles F, Simon C, Pellicer A. Reproductive impact of congenital Müllerian anomalies. Human Reproduction. 1997;12(10):2277-2281. https://doi.org/10.1093/humrep/12.10.2277
  4. Acien P. Incidence of Müllerian defects in fertile and infertile women. Human Reproduction. 1997;12(7):1372-1376. https://doi.org/10.1093/oxfordjournals.humrep.a019588
  5. Muller P, Musset R, Netter A, Solal R, Vinourd JC, Gillet JY. Etat du haut appareil urinaire chez les porteuses de malformations uterines. Etude de 133 observations. La Presse Medicale. 1967;75(26): 1331-1336.
  6. Devi Wold AS, Pham N, Arici A. Anatomic factors in recurrent pregnancy loss. Seminars in Reproductive Medicine. 2006;24(1): 25-32.  https://doi.org/10.1055/s-2006-931798
  7. Jurkovic D, Geipel A, Gruboeck K, Jauniaux E, Natucci M, Campbell S. Three-dimensional ultrasound for the assessment of uterine anatomy and detection of congenital anomalies: comparison with hysterosalpingography and two-dimensional sonography. Ultrasound in Obstetrics and Gynecology. 1995;5(4): 233-237.  https://doi.org/10.1046/j.1469-0705.1995.05040233.x
  8. Pascual MA, Hereter L, Graupera B, Fernández Cid M, Dexeus S. Ecografía 3D/4D en ginecología: técnica y metodología. Progresos de Obstetricia y Ginecología. 2006;49(5):263-271.  https://doi.org/10.1016/s0304-5013(06)72605-x
  9. Bermejo C, Martínez Ten P, Cantarero R, Diaz D, Pérez Pedregosa J, Barrón E, Labrador E, Ruiz López L. Three-dimensional ultrasound in the diagnosis of Müllerian duct anomalies and concordance with magnetic resonance imaging. Ultrasound in Obstetrics and Gynecology. 2010;35(5):593-601.  https://doi.org/10.1002/uog.7551
  10. Deutch TD, Abuhamad AZ. The role of 3-dimensional ultrasonography and magnetic resonance imaging in the diagnosis of müllerian duct anomalies: a review of the literatura. Journal of Ultrasound in Medicine. 2008;27(3):413-423.  https://doi.org/10.7863/jum.2008.27.3.413
  11. Ludwin A, Ludwin I, Pityński K, Banas T, Jach R. Role of morphologic characteristics of the uterine septum in the prediction and prevention of abnormal healing outcomes after hysteroscopic metroplasty. Human Reproduction. 2014;29(7):1420-1431. https://doi.org/10.1093/humrep/deu110
  12. Adamyan LV, Kulakov VI, Khashukoeva AZ. Poroki razvitiya matki i vlagalishcha. M.: Meditsina; 1998. (In Russ.).
  13. Demidov VN. Ul’trazvukovaya diagnostika porokov razvitiya matki i vlagalishcha (Klinicheskaya lektsiya). Vypusk VII. M.: Triada-X; 2006. (In Russ.).
  14. Grimbizis GF, Gordts S, Di Spiezio Sardo A, Brucker S, De Angelis C, Gergolet M, Li TC, Tanos V, Brölmann H, Gianaroli L, Campo R. The ESHRE/ESGE consensus on the classification of female genital tract congenital anomalies. Human Reproduction. 2013;28(8): 2032-2044. https://doi.org/10.1093/humrep/det098
  15. Adamyan LV, Sibirskaya EV, Arslanyan KN, Zhuravleva SA, Smal TA. Pathology of the development of the uterus and vagina in girls and girls with a violation of the outflow of menstrual blood. Akusherstvo i ginekologiya: Novosti. Mneniya. Obuchenie. 2015;10(4): 36-40. (In Russ.).
  16. Troiano RN, McCarthy SM. Müllerian duct anomalies: imaging and clinical issues. Radiology. 2004;233(1):19-34.  https://doi.org/10.1148/radiol.2331020777
  17. García González P, Meana Morís AR, Gracía Chapullé A, Matesanz Pérez JL. Lesión quística congénita en la pelvis: un caso de útero didelfo con doble vagina, hematocolpos y agenesia renal ipsilateral: papel de la resonancia magnética. [The role of MRI in congenital cystic lesions in the pelvis: a case of uterus didelphys with double vagina, hematocolpos, and ipsilateral renal agenesis.] Radiologia. 2009;51(2):194-197.  https://doi.org/10.1016/j.rx.2009.01.001
  18. Ludwin A, Pityński K, Ludwin I, Banas T, Knafel A. Two- and three-dimensional ultrasonography and sonohysterography versus hysteroscopy with laparoscopy in the differential diagnosis of septate, bicornuate, and arcuate uteri. Journal of Minimally Invasive Gynecology. 2013;20(1):90-99.  https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jmig.2012.09.011
  19. Gubbini G, Di Spiezio Sardo A, Nascetti D, Marra E, Spinelli M, Greco E, Casadio P, Nappi C. New outpatient subclassification system for American Fertility Society Classes V and VI uterine anomalies. Journal of Minimally Invasive Gynecology. 2009;16(5): 554-561.  https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jmig.2009.06.002
  20. Ludwin A, Coelho Neto MA, Ludwin I, Nastri CO, Costa W, Acién M, Alcazar JL, Benacerraf B, Condous G, DeCherney A, De Wilde RL, Diamond MP, Emanuel MH, Guerriero S, Hurd W, Levine D, Lindheim S, Pellicer A, Petraglia F, Saridogan E, Martins WP. Congenital Uterine Malformation by Experts (CUME): diagnostic criteria for T-shaped uterus. Ultrasound in Obstetrics and Gynecology. 2020;55(6):815-829.  https://doi.org/10.1002/uog.20845
  21. Ghi T, Casadio P, Kuleva M, Perrone AM, Savelli L, Gianchi S, Pelusi C, Pelusi G. Accuracy of three-dimensional ultrasound in diagnosis and classification of congenital uterine anomalies. Fertility and Sterility. 2009;92(2):808-813.  https://doi.org/10.1016/j.fertnstert.2008.05.086
  22. Ludwin A, Martins WP, Nastri CO, Ludwin I, Coelho Neto MA, Leitão VM, Acién M, Alcazar JL, Benacerraf B, Condous G, De Wilde RL, Emanuel MH, Gibbons W, Guerriero S, Hurd WW, Levine D, Lindheim S, Pellicer A, Petraglia F, Saridogan E. Congenital Uterine Malformation by Experts (CUME): better criteria for distinguishing between normal/arcuate and septate uterus? Ultrasound in Obstetrics and Gynecology. 2018;51(2):282.  https://doi.org/10.1002/uog.18923
Contact the author
Email
Message
The publishing house "Media Sphere" does not provide treatment services, does not give recommendations on contacting medical institutions and specific specialists, on the prescription of medicines and dietary supplements.

Email Confirmation

An email was sent to test@gmail.com with a confirmation link. Follow the link from the letter to complete the registration on the site.

Email Confirmation

Contact us
If you have any questions, complaints or suggestions, please use this feedback form.
Email
Message
The publishing house "Media Sphere" does not provide treatment services, does not give recommendations on contacting medical institutions and specific specialists, on the prescription of medicines and dietary supplements.
Submit Application

You can become an author of one of our magazines, send a request and we will consider it in during the day.

Name
Phone
E-mail
Message
Login
Registration
E-mail
Password
Forgot Password?

Log in to the site using your account in one of the services

Password recovery
E-mail
Login
Register

We use cооkies to improve the performance of the site. By staying on our site, you agree to the terms of use of cооkies. To view our Privacy and Cookie Policy, please. click here.