|
[1]
|
Behr SC, Courtier JL, Qayyum A. Imaging of müllerian duct anomalies[J]. Radiographics, 2012, 32:E233-E250. doi: 10.1148/rg.326125515 |
|
[2]
|
Santos XM, Krishnamurthy R, Bercaw-Pratt JL, et al. The utility of ultrasound and magnetic resonance imaging versus surgery for the characterization of müllerian anomalies in the pediatric and adolescent population[J]. J Pediatr Adolesc Gynecol, 2012, 25:181-184. doi: 10.1016/j.jpag.2011.12.069 |
|
[3]
|
The American Fertility Society classifications of adnexal adhesions, distal tubal occlusion, tubal occlusion secondary to tubal ligation, tubal pregnancies, müllerian anomalies and intrauterine adhesions[J]. Fertil Steril, 1988, 49: 944. |
|
[4]
|
Salim R, Woelfer B, Backos M, et al. Reproducibility of three-dimensional ultrasound diagnosis of congenital uterine anomalies[J]. Ultrasound Obstet Gynecol, 2003, 21:578-582. doi: 10.1002/uog.127 |
|
[5]
|
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 literature[J]. J Ultrasound Med, 2008, 27:413-423. doi: 10.7863/jum.2008.27.3.413 |
|
[6]
|
Gergolet M, Campo R, Verdenik I, et al. No clinical relevance of the height of fundal indentation in subseptate or arcuate uterus:a prospective study[J]. Reprod Biomed Online, 2012, 24:576-582. doi: 10.1016/j.rbmo.2012.01.025 |
|
[7]
|
Mucowski SJ, Herndon CN, Rosen MP. The arcuate uterine anomaly:a critical appraisal of its diagnostic and clinical relevance[J]. Obstet Gynecol Surv, 2010, 65:449-454. doi: 10.1097/OGX.0b013e3181efb0db |
|
[8]
|
Acién P, Acién M, Sánchez-Ferrer M. Complex malformations of the female genital tract. New types and revision of classification[J]. Hum Reprod, 2004, 19:2377. doi: 10.1093/humrep/deh423 |
|
[9]
|
Oppelt P, Renner SP, Brucker S, et al. The VCUAM (Vagina Cervix Uterus Adnex-associated Malformation) classification:a new classification for genital malformations[J]. Fertil Steril, 2005, 84:1493-1497. doi: 10.1016/j.fertnstert.2005.05.036 |
|
[10]
|
Saravelos SH, Cocksedge KA, Li TC. Prevalence and diagnosis of congenital uterine anomalies in women with reproductive failure:a critical appraisal[J]. Hum Reprod Update, 2008, 14:415-429. doi: 10.1093/humupd/dmn018 |
|
[11]
|
Mazouni C, Girard G, Deter R, et al. Diagnosis of Mullerian anomalies in adults:evaluation of practice[J]. Fertil Steril, 2008, 89:219-222. doi: 10.1016/j.fertnstert.2007.02.044 |
|
[12]
|
Bermejo C, Martínez Ten P, Cantarero R, et al. Three-dimensional ultrasound in the diagnosis of Müllerian duct anomalies and concordance with magnetic resonance imaging[J]. Ultrasound Obstet Gynecol, 2010, 35:593. doi: 10.1002/uog.7551 |
|
[13]
|
Bocca SM, Abuhamad AZ. Use of 3-dimensional sonography to assess uterine anomalies[J]. J Ultrasound Med, 2013, 32:1-6. doi: 10.7863/jum.2013.32.1.1 |
|
[14]
|
Chan YY, Jayaprakasan K, Zamora J, et al. The prevalence of congenital uterine anomalies in unselected and high-risk populations:a systematic review[J]. Hum Reprod Update, 2011, 17:761-771. doi: 10.1093/humupd/dmr028 |
|
[15]
|
Ludwin A, Pityński K, Ludwin I, et al. Two-and three-dimensional ultrasonography and sonohysterography versus hysteroscopy with laparoscopy in the differential diagnosis of septate, bicornuate, and arcuate uteri[J]. J Minim Invasive Gynecol, 2013, 20:90-99. doi: 10.1016/j.jmig.2012.09.011 |
|
[16]
|
Acholonu UC, Silberzweig J, Stein DE, et al. Hysterosalpingography versus sonohysterography for intrauterine abnormalities[J]. JSLS, 2011, 15:471-474. doi: 10.4293/108680811X13176785203923 |
|
[17]
|
Ludwin A, Ludwin I, Banas T, et al. Diagnostic accuracy of sonohysterography, hysterosalpingography and diagnostic hysteroscopy in diagnosis of arcuate, septate and bicornuate uterus[J]. J Obstet Gynaecol Res, 2011, 37:178-186. doi: 10.1111/j.1447-0756.2010.01304.x |
|
[18]
|
Caliskan E, Ozkan S, Cakiroglu Y, et al. Diagnostic accuracy of real-time 3D sonography in the diagnosis of congenital Mullerian anomalies in high-risk patients with respect to the phase of the menstrual cycle[J]. J Clin Ultrasound, 2010, 38:123-127. http://www.wanfangdata.com.cn/details/detail.do?_type=perio&id=a47db1ee889bb30003ff78043ef3e1ea |
|
[19]
|
Hajishaiha M, Ghasemi-Rad M, Karimpour N, et al. Transvaginal sonographic evaluation at different menstrual cycle phases in diagnosis of uterine lesions[J]. Int J Womens Health, 2011, 3:353-357. |
|
[20]
|
Niknejadi M, Haghighi H, Ahmadi F, et al. Diagnostic accuracy of transvaginal sonography in the detection of uterine abnormalities in infertile women[J]. Iran J Radiol, 2012, 9:139-144. doi: 10.5812/iranjradiol.8063 |
|
[21]
|
Troiano RN, McCarthy SM. Mullerian duct anomalies:imaging and clinical issues[J]. Radiology, 2004, 233:19-34. doi: 10.1148/radiol.2331020777 |
|
[22]
|
Olpin JD, Heilbrun M. Imaging of Mullerian duct anomalies[J]. Clin Obstet Gynecol, 2009, 52:40-56. doi: 10.1097/GRF.0b013e3181958439 |
|
[23]
|
Shulman LP. Mullerian anomalies[J]. Clin Obstet Gynecol, 2008, 51:214-222. doi: 10.1097/GRF.0b013e31816feba0 |
|
[24]
|
Ghi T, Casadio P, Kuleva M, et al. Accuracy of three-dimensional ultrasound in diagnosis and classification of congenital uterine anomalies[J]. Fertil Steril, 2009, 92:808-813. doi: 10.1016/j.fertnstert.2008.05.086 |
|
[25]
|
Salim R, Woelfer B, Backos M, et al. Reproducibility of three-dimensional ultrasound diagnosis of congenital uterine anomalies[J]. Ultrasound Obstet Gynecol, 2003, 21:578-582. doi: 10.1002/uog.127 |
|
[26]
|
Moini A, Mohammadi S, Hosseini R, et al. Accuracy of 3-dimensional sonography for diagnosis and classification of congenital uterine anomalies[J]. J Ultrasound Med, 2013, 32:923-927. doi: 10.7863/ultra.32.6.923 |
|
[27]
|
Faivre E, Fernandez H, Deffieux X, et al. Accuracy of three-dimensional ultrasonography in differential diagnosis of septate and bicornuate uterus compared with office hysteroscopy and pelvic magnetic resonance imaging[J]. J Minim Invasive Gynecol, 2012, 19:101-106. doi: 10.1016/j.jmig.2011.08.724 |
|
[28]
|
Abuhamad AZ, Singleton S, Zhao Y, et al. The Z technique:an easy approach to the display of the mid-coronal plane of the uterus in volume sonography[J]. J Ultrasound Med, 2006, 25:607-612. doi: 10.7863/jum.2006.25.5.607 |
|
[29]
|
Terry S, Banks E, Harris K, et al. Comparison of 3-dimensional with 2-dimensional saline infusion sonohysterograms for the evaluation of intrauterine abnormalities[J]. J Clin Ultrasound, 2009, 37:258-262. doi: 10.1002/jcu.20561 |
|
[30]
|
Bij de Vaate AJ, Brölmann HA, van der Slikke JW, et al. Gel instillation sonohysterography (GIS) and saline contrast sonohysterography (SCSH):comparison of two diagnostic techniques[J].Ultrasound Obstet Gynecol, 2010, 35:486-489. doi: 10.1002/uog.7594 |
|
[31]
|
Dzotsenidze TN, Davarashvili DI, Nikolaishvili TG, et al. Contrast sono hysterosalpingography in the study of endometrial abnormalities and tubal patency in infertile patients[J]. Georgian Med News, 2006, (139):61-63. |
|
[32]
|
Shokeir T, Abdelshaheed M. Sonohysterography as a first-line evaluation for uterine abnormalities in women with recurrent failed in vitro fertilization-embryo transfer[J]. Fertil Steril, 2009, 91:1321-1322. doi: 10.1016/j.fertnstert.2008.02.135 |
|
[33]
|
Kupesic S, Plavsic BM. 2D and 3D hysterosalpingo-contrast-sonography in the assessment of uterine cavity and tubal patency[J]. Eur J Obstet Gynecol Reprod Biol, 2007, 133:64-69. doi: 10.1016/j.ejogrb.2006.10.010 |
|
[34]
|
Church DG, Vancil JM, Vasanawala SS. Magnetic resonance imaging for uterine and vaginal anomalies[J]. Curr Opin Obstet Gynecol, 2009, 21:379-389. doi: 10.1097/GCO.0b013e3283307c3e |
|
[35]
|
Marcal L, Nothaft MA, Coelho F, et al. Mullerian duct anomalies:MR imaging[J]. Abdom Imaging, 2011, 36:756-764. doi: 10.1007/s00261-010-9681-x |
|
[36]
|
Mueller GC, Hussain HK, Smith YR, et al. Müllerian Duct Anomalies:comparison of MRI diagnosis and clinical diagnosis[J]. Am J Roentgenol, 2007, 189:1294-1302. doi: 10.2214/AJR.07.2494 |
|
[37]
|
Taylor E, Gomel V. The uterus and fertility[J]. Fertil Steril, 2008, 89:1-16. doi: 10.1016/j.fertnstert.2007.09.069 |
|
[38]
|
Dendrinos S, Grigoriou O, Sakkas EG, et al. Hysteroscopy in the evaluation of habitual abortions[J]. Eur J Contracept Reprod Health Care, 2008, 13:198-200. doi: 10.1080/13625180801920032 |
|
[39]
|
Smit JG, Kasius JC, Eijkemans MJ, et al. The international agreement study on the diagnosis of the septate uterus at office hysteroscopy in infertile patients[J]. Fertil Steril, 2013, 99:2108-2113. doi: 10.1016/j.fertnstert.2013.02.027 |
|
[40]
|
Bettocchi S, Ceci O, Nappi L, et al. Office hysteroscopic metroplasty:"three diagnostic criteria" to differentiate between septate and bicornuate uteri[J]. J Minim Invasive Gynecol, 2007, 14:324-328. doi: 10.1016/j.jmig.2006.11.010 |
|
[41]
|
Cooper NA, Smith P, Khan KS, et al. A systematic review of the effect of the distension medium on pain during outpatient hysteroscopy[J]. Fertil Steril, 2011, 95:264-271. doi: 10.1016/j.fertnstert.2010.04.080 |
|
[42]
|
Koskas M, Mergui JL, Yazbeck C, et al. Office hysteroscopy for infertility:a series of 557 consecutive cases[J]. Obstet Gynecol Int, 2010, 2010:168096. |
|
[43]
|
El-Mazny A, Abou-Salem N, El-Sherbiny W, et al. Outpatient hysteroscopy:a routine investigation before assisted reproductive techniques?[J]. Fertil Steril, 2011, 95:272-276. doi: 10.1016/j.fertnstert.2010.06.033 |
作者投稿
专家审稿
编辑办公
邮件订阅
RSS
点击查看大图
下载:
