Basic Gynecologic Ultrasound Examination (Level I): DEGUM, ÖGUM, and SGUM Recommendations

Abstract

Ultrasound has become an essential diagnostic tool in gynecology, and every practicing gynecologist must be able to differentiate normal from pathologic findings, such as benign or malignant pelvic masses, adnexal torsion, pelvic inflammation disease, endometriosis, ectopic pregnancies, and congenital uterine malformations at least on a basic level. A standardized approach to the correct settings of the ultrasound system, the indications for gynecologic ultrasound investigations, and the sonographic appearance of normal anatomy and common pathologic findings in the standard planes are important prerequisites for safe and confident clinical management of gynecologic patients. Based on current publications and different national and international guidelines, updated DEGUM, ÖGUM, and SGUM recommendations for the performance of basic gynecologic ultrasound examinations were established.

Key words

gynecology - education - training - quality Assurance - basic ultrasound

• References

• 1 Eichhorn KH, Schramm T, Bald R. et al. Qualitätsanforderungen an die DEGUM-Stufe I bei der geburtshilflichen Ultraschalldiagnostik im Zeitraum 19–22 Schwangerschaftswochen. Ultraschall in Med 2006; 28: 185-187
• 2 Merz E, Eichhorn KH, von Kaisenberg C. et al. Aktualisierte Qualitätsanforderungen an die weiterführende differenzierte Ultraschalluntersuchung in der pränatalen Diagnostik (=DEGUM-Stufe II) im Zeitraum von 18+0 bis 21+6 Schwangerschaftswochen. Ultraschall in Med 2012; 33: 593-596
• 3 Grab D, Merz E, Prömpeler H. et al. Standards zur gynäkologischen Sonografie. Ultraschall in Med 2011; 32: 415-417
• 4 Bajka M, Berclaz G, Müller RC. et al. Empfehlungen zur Ultraschalluntersuchung in der Gynäkologie. Leitlinie der Schweizerischen Gesellschaft für Ultraschall in der Medizin, Sektion Gynäkologie und Geburtshilfe (SGUMGG) und der Schweizerischen Gesellschaft für Gynäkologie und Geburtshilfe (SGGG). 2. Aufl.. 2012
• 5 EFSUMB (European Federation of Societies for Ultrasound in Medicine and Biology). Minimum training requirements for the practice of medical ultrasound in medicine. Ultraschall in Med 2006; 27: 79-105
• 6 Salvasen KA, Lees C, Tutschek B. Basic European ultrasound training in obstetrics and gynecology: where are we and where do we go from here?. Ultrasound Obstet Gynecol 2010; 36: 525-529
• 7 ISUOG (International Society of Ultrasound in Obstetrics and Gynecology). Education Committee recommendations for basic training in obstetric and gynecological ultrasound. Ultrasound Obstet Gynecol 2014; 43: 113-116
• 8 Leonardi M, Murji A, D’Souza R. Ultrasound curricula in obstetrics and gynecology training programs. Ultrasound Obstet Gynecol 2018; 52: 147-150
• 9 Bernaschek G, Deutinger J. Endosonography in obstetrics and gynecology: The importance of standardized image display. Obstet Gynecol 1989; 74: 817-819
• 10 Timmermann D, Valentin L, Bourne TH. et al. Terms, definitions, and measurements to describe the sonographic features of adnexal tumors: a consensus opinion from the International Ovarian Tumor Analysis (IOTA) Group. Ultrasound Obstet Gynecol 2000; 16: 500-505
• 11 Leone FPG, Timmermann D, Bourne T. et al. Terms, definitions and measurements to describe the sonographic of the endometrium and intrauterine lesions: a consensus opinion from the International Endometrial Tumor Analysis (IETA) group. Ultrasound Obstet Gynecol 2010; 35: 103-112
• 12 Van den Bosch T, Duehom M, Leone FPG. et al. Terms, definitions and measurements to describe sonographic features of myometrium and uterine masses: a consensus opinion from the Morphological Uterus Sonographic Assessment (MUSA) group. Ultrasound Obstet Gynecol 2015; 46: 284-298
• 13 Van den Bosch T, De Brujn AM, De Leeuw RA. et al. Sonographic classification and reporting system for diagnosing adenomyosis. Ultrasound Obstet Gynecol 2019; 53: 576-582
• 14 Andreotti RF, Timmerman D, Strachowski LM. et al. O-RADS US Risk Stratification and Management System: A Consensus Guideline from the ACR Ovarian-Adnexal Reporting and Data System Committee. Radiology 2020; 294: 168-185
• 15 Van den Bosch T, Verbakel JY, Valentin L. et al. Typical ultrasound features of various endometrial pathologies described using International Endometrial Tumor Analysis (IETA) terminology in women with abnormal uterine bleeding. Ultrasound Obstet Gynecol 2021; 57: 164-172
• 16 Arbeitsgemeinschaft der Wissenschaftlichen Medizinischen Fachgesellschaften AWMF. Harninkontinenz der Frau. Leitlinie der Deutschen Gesellschaft für Gynäkologie und Geburtshilfe (DGGG). AWMF 015/091(S2k). 2022
• 17 Timmermann D, Testa C, Bourne T. et al. Simple ultrasound-based rules for the diagnosis of ovarian cancer. Ultrasound Obstet Gynecol 2008; 31: 681-690
• 18 Merz E. Is transducer hygiene sufficient when vaginal probes are used in the clinical routine?. Ultrasound in Med 2016; 37: 137-139
• 19 American Institute of Ultrasound in Medicine (AIUM). Guidelines for cleaning and preparing external- and internal-use ultrasound transducers and equipment between patients as well as safe handling and use of ultrasound coupling gel. https://www.aium.org/officialstatements/57 Approved: 05/16/2017; Reapproved: 03/25/2018, 11/03/2018, 03/27/2020, 03/05/2021
• 20 Guerriero S, Condous G, van den Bosch T. et al. Systematic approach to sonographic evaluation of the pelvis in women with suspected endometriosis, including terms, definitions and measurements: a consensus opinion from the International Deep Endometriosis Analysis (IDEA) group. Ultrasound Obstet Gynecol 2016; 48: 318-332
• 21 Ludovisi M, Moro F, Pasciuto T. et al. Imaging in gynecological disease (15): clinical and ultrasound characteristics of uterine sarcoma. Ultrasound Obstet Gynecol 2019; 54: 676-687
• 22 Munro MG, Critchley HOD, Fraser IS. The FIGO classification of causes of abnormal uterine bleeding in the reproductive years. Fertil Steril 2011; 95 (07) 2204-2208
• 23 Rempen A, Chaoui R, Häusler M. et al. Quality requirements for ultrasound examination in early pregnancy (DEGUM Level I) between 4+0 and 13+6 weeks of gestation. Ultraschall in Med 2016; 37: 559-583
• 24 Ameye L, Timmerman D, Valentin L. et al. Clinical oriented three-step strategy for assessment of adnexal pathology. Ultrasound Obstet Gynecol 2012; 40: 582-591
• 25 Van Calster B, van Hoorde K, Valentin L. et al. Evaluating the risk of ovarian cancer before surgery using the ADNEX model to differentiate between benign, borderline, early and advanced stage invasive and secondary metastatic tumours: prospective multicentre diagnostic study. BMJ 2014; 349: g5920
• 26 Timmerman D, Planchamp F, Bourne T. et al. ESCO/ISUOG/IOTA/ESGE Consensus Statement on preoperative diagnosis of ovarian tumors. Ultrasound Obstet Gynecol 2021; 58: 148-168
• 27 Benjaminov O, Atri M. Sonography of the abnormal fallopian tube. Am J Roentgenol 2004; 183: 737-742
• 28 Timor-Tritsch IE, Lerner JP, Monteagudo A. et al. Transvaginal sonographic markers of tubal inflammatory disease. Ultrasound Obstet Gynecol 1998; 12: 56-66
• 29 Condous G, Okaro E, Khalid A. et al. The accuracy of transvaginal ultrasound for the diagnosis of ectopic pregnancy prior to surgery. Hum Reprod 2005; 20 (05) 1404-1409
• 30 Tsakiridis I, Giouleka S, Mamopoulos A. et al. Diagnosis and management of ectopic pregnancy: A comparative review of major national guidelines. Obstet Gynecol Surv 2020; 75: 611-623
• 31 Pape J, Bajka A, Strutas D. et al. The predictive value of decisive and soft ultrasound criteria for ectopic pregnancy identification in 321 preoperative cases. Ultraschall in Med 2021;
• 32 Hoopmann M, Tutschek B, Merz E. et al. Qualitätsanforderungen für gynäkologische Ultraschalluntersuchungen durch die DEGUM-Stufe II. Ultraschall in Med 2021;