Download PDF
Ultraschall Med 2019; 40(03): 288-291
DOI: 10.1055/a-0868-3760
Editorial
© Georg Thieme Verlag KG Stuttgart · New York

30-year anniversary of ultrasound: Clinical use of 3D ultrasound in obstetrics and gynecology (1989–2019)

30-jähriges Ultraschalljubiläum: Klinischer Einsatz der 3D-Sonografie in Gynäkologie und Geburtshilfe (1989–2019)
Eberhard Merz
,
Rabih Chaoui
Further Information

Publication History

Publication Date:
28 May 2019 (online)

Also available at
   Permissions and Reprints

When the first commercial 3D ultrasound device (Combison 330, Kretztechnik, Zipf, Austria) became available in 1989 ([Fig. 1]) [1], no one could have predicted just how important 3D ultrasound would become. While only the multiplanar mode with visualization of three orthogonal image planes was initially available, various imaging modes have been developed in the last three decades [2] [3] [4] [5] [6] [7] [8] [9] [10] [11] allowing a wide range of imaging options in comparison to 2D ultrasound. Today, anatomical structures can be visualized with almost photographic quality ([Fig. 2a, b]) [12] [13] [14] [15] [16]. The rapid advances in the field of computer technology and the design of special 3D probes have undoubtedly played an important role in this process [2] [7]. However, all of these developments were only possible as a result of the vision of individual ultrasound companies, the dedicated work of engineers, and the ongoing collaboration between developers and users of 3D ultrasound in the clinical routine.

 

  • References

  • 1 Kirbach D, Whittingham TA. 3D ultrasound – the Kretztechnik Voluson® approach. Eur J Ultrasound 1994; 1: 85-89
    PubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 2 Merz E, Abramowicz JS. 3D/4D ultrasound in prenatal diagnosis: is it time for routine use?. Clin Obstet Gynecol 2012; 55: 336-351
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 3 Devore GR, Falkensammer P, Sklansky MS. et al. Spatiotemporal image correlation (STIC): new technology for evaluation of the fetal heart. Ultrasound Obstet Gynecol 2003; 22: 380-387
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 4 Chaoui R, Heling KS. New developments in fetal heart scanning: three-and four-dimensional fetal echocardiography. Semin Fetal Neonatal Med 2005; 10: 567-577
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 5 Benoit B, Chaoui R. Three-dimensional ultrasound with maximal mode rendering: a novel technique for the diagnosis of bilateral or unilateral absence or hypoplasia of nasal bones in second-trimester screening for Down syndrome. Ultrasound Obstet Gynecol 2005; 25: 19-24
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 6 Kurjak A, Miskovic B, Stanojevic M. et al. New scoring system for fetal neurobehaviour assessed by three- and four-dimensional sonography. J Perinat Med 2008; 36: 73-81
    PubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 7 Merz E. 25 years of 3D ultrasound in prenatal diagnosis (1989–2014). Ultraschall in Med 2015; 36: 2-8
    PubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 8 Pooh RK. “See-through fashion” in prenatal diagnostic imaging. Donald School J Ultrasound Obstet Gynecol 2015; 9: 111
    PubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 9 Hata T, AboEllail MA, Sajapala S. et al. HDlive Silhouette mode with spatiotemporal image correlation for assessment of the fetal heart. J Ultrasound Med 2016; 35: n1489-1495
    PubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 10 DeVore GR, Satou G, Sklansky M. 4D fetal echocardiography – an update. Echocardiography 2017; 34: 1788-1798
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 11 Merz E, Kurjak A. 1989–2019: 30 Years of 3D Ultrasound in Obstetrics and Gynecology. Donald School J Ultrasound Obstet Gynecol 2018; 12: 1-5
    PubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 12 Merz E, Pashaj S. Advantages of 3D ultrasound in the assessment of fetal abnormalities. J Perinat Med 2017; 45: 643-650
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 13 Pashaj S, Merz E. Detection of fetal corpus callosum abnormalities by means of 3D ultrasound. Ultraschall in Med 2016; 37: 185-194
    Article in Thieme ConnectPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 14 Merz E. Physiological umbilical herniation—a distinctive sonographic feature in the embryonic stage. Ultraschall in Med 2017; 38: 123-124
    Article in Thieme ConnectPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 15 Merz E, Pashaj S. True or false umbilical cord knot? Differentiation via 3D/4D color Doppler ultrasound. Ultraschall in Med 2018; 39: 127-128
    Article in Thieme ConnectPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 16 Salihagić-Kadić A, Kurjak A. Cognitive function of the fetus. Ultraschall in Med 2018; 39: 181-189
    Article in Thieme ConnectPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 17 EFSUMB Newsletter. Statement on the Use of Diagnostic Ultrasound for Producing Souvenir Images or Recordings in Pregnancy. Ultraschall in Med 2007; 28: 100
    Article in Thieme ConnectPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 18 Merz E. 3D/4D-Ultrasound in Obstetrics – Baby TV without Diagnostics?. Ultraschall in Med 2008; 29: 156-158
    Article in Thieme ConnectPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 19 Merz E, Benoit B, Blass HG. et al. Standardization of three-dimensional images in obstetrics and gynecology: consensus statement. Ultrasound Obstet Gynecol 2007; 29: 697-703
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 20 Deng J. Nomenclature of three-dimensional and four-dimensional ultrasound in obstetrics, gynecology, and fetal echocardiography. In: Merz E, Kurjak A. (eds) Donald School Textbook: Current status of clinical use of 3D/4D ultrasound in obstetrics and gynecology. New Delhi – London – Panama: Jaypee Brothers Medical Publishers; 2019: 61-74
    Google Scholar