Comparison of two- and three-dimensional transvaginal ultrasound in the visualisation of intrauterine devices

The aims of the study were to evaluate whether three-dimensional transvaginal ultrasound (3D TV US) is superior to two-dimensional transvaginal ultrasound (2D TV US) at visualising intrauterine devices and determining their position. This prospective study included 52 participants with an intrauterine device fitted, who underwent 2D TV US and 3D TV US. 2D TV US and 3D-reconstructed coronal images were reviewed by two gynaecological radiologists to assess ease of visualisation and position of the intrauterine devices. Statistical analysis was performed using Wilcoxon signed-rank, McNemar and Chi-squared tests. The inter-observer agreement was measured using Cohen’s Kappa. Intrauterine device visualisation scores were significantly higher with 2D TV US compared with 3D TV US (Radiologist 1 p = <0.001, Radiologist 2 p = 0.007). A significant number of T-arms appeared to perforate into the adjacent myometrium on the 3D-reconstructed coronal image, but were normal on the 2D images (Radiologist 1 p = <0.001, Radiologist 2 p = 0.008). Radiologist 1 found 19 perforated T-arms on 3D TV US compared with four on 2D TV US. Radiologist 2 found 13 perforated T-arms on 3D TV US compared with five on 2D TV US. Both radiologists agreed on the positions of the intrauterine devices substantially with 3D TV US (Kappa = 0.69) and moderately with 2D TV US (Kappa = 0.55). The 3D TV US did not visualise an intrauterine device better than 2D TV US. The 3D-reconstructed coronal image of the uterus can reliably display cases of T-arm perforation into the adjacent myometrium, which could be missed on 2D TV US images. The 3D TV US should be used in addition to 2D TV US in all cases where an intrauterine device is under evaluation.