Cargando…

Dimensional analysis of the endometrial cavity: how many dimensions should the ideal intrauterine device or system have?

BACKGROUND: The geometrical shape of the human uterus most closely approximates that of a prolate ellipsoid. The endometrial cavity itself is more likely to also have the shape of a prolate ellipsoid especially when the extension of the cervix is omitted. Using this information and known endometrial...

Descripción completa

Detalles Bibliográficos
Autor principal: Goldstuck, Norman D
Formato: Online Artículo Texto
Lenguaje:English
Publicado: Dove Medical Press 2018
Materias:
Acceso en línea:https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC5901129/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/29692635
http://dx.doi.org/10.2147/IJWH.S158281
_version_ 1783314546410127360
author Goldstuck, Norman D
author_facet Goldstuck, Norman D
author_sort Goldstuck, Norman D
collection PubMed
description BACKGROUND: The geometrical shape of the human uterus most closely approximates that of a prolate ellipsoid. The endometrial cavity itself is more likely to also have the shape of a prolate ellipsoid especially when the extension of the cervix is omitted. Using this information and known endometrial cavity volumes and lateral and vertical dimensions, it is possible to calculate the anteroposterior (AP) dimensions and get a complete evaluation of all possible dimensions of the endometrial cavity. These are singular observations and not part of any other study. METHODS: The AP dimensions of the endometrial cavity of the uterus were calculated using the formula for the volume of the prolate ellipsoid to complete a three-dimensional picture of the endometrial cavity. RESULTS: Calculations confirm ultrasound imaging which shows large variations in cavity size and shape. Known cavity volumes and length and breadth measurements indicate that the AP diameter may vary from 6.29 to 38.2 mm. These measurements confirm the difficulty of getting a fixed-frame intrauterine device (IUD) to accommodate to a space of highly variable dimensions. This is especially true of three-dimension IUDs. A one-dimensional frameless IUD is most likely to be able to conform to this highly variable space and shape. CONCLUSION: The endometrial cavity may assume many varied prolate ellipsoid configurations where one or more measurements may be too small to accommodate standard IUDs. A one-dimensional device is most likely to be able to be accommodated by most uterine cavities as compared to two- and three-dimensional devices.
format Online
Article
Text
id pubmed-5901129
institution National Center for Biotechnology Information
language English
publishDate 2018
publisher Dove Medical Press
record_format MEDLINE/PubMed
spelling pubmed-59011292018-04-24 Dimensional analysis of the endometrial cavity: how many dimensions should the ideal intrauterine device or system have? Goldstuck, Norman D Int J Womens Health Short Report BACKGROUND: The geometrical shape of the human uterus most closely approximates that of a prolate ellipsoid. The endometrial cavity itself is more likely to also have the shape of a prolate ellipsoid especially when the extension of the cervix is omitted. Using this information and known endometrial cavity volumes and lateral and vertical dimensions, it is possible to calculate the anteroposterior (AP) dimensions and get a complete evaluation of all possible dimensions of the endometrial cavity. These are singular observations and not part of any other study. METHODS: The AP dimensions of the endometrial cavity of the uterus were calculated using the formula for the volume of the prolate ellipsoid to complete a three-dimensional picture of the endometrial cavity. RESULTS: Calculations confirm ultrasound imaging which shows large variations in cavity size and shape. Known cavity volumes and length and breadth measurements indicate that the AP diameter may vary from 6.29 to 38.2 mm. These measurements confirm the difficulty of getting a fixed-frame intrauterine device (IUD) to accommodate to a space of highly variable dimensions. This is especially true of three-dimension IUDs. A one-dimensional frameless IUD is most likely to be able to conform to this highly variable space and shape. CONCLUSION: The endometrial cavity may assume many varied prolate ellipsoid configurations where one or more measurements may be too small to accommodate standard IUDs. A one-dimensional device is most likely to be able to be accommodated by most uterine cavities as compared to two- and three-dimensional devices. Dove Medical Press 2018-04-09 /pmc/articles/PMC5901129/ /pubmed/29692635 http://dx.doi.org/10.2147/IJWH.S158281 Text en © 2018 Goldstuck. This work is published and licensed by Dove Medical Press Limited The full terms of this license are available at https://www.dovepress.com/terms.php and incorporate the Creative Commons Attribution – Non Commercial (unported, v3.0) License (http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc/3.0/). By accessing the work you hereby accept the Terms. Non-commercial uses of the work are permitted without any further permission from Dove Medical Press Limited, provided the work is properly attributed.
spellingShingle Short Report
Goldstuck, Norman D
Dimensional analysis of the endometrial cavity: how many dimensions should the ideal intrauterine device or system have?
title Dimensional analysis of the endometrial cavity: how many dimensions should the ideal intrauterine device or system have?
title_full Dimensional analysis of the endometrial cavity: how many dimensions should the ideal intrauterine device or system have?
title_fullStr Dimensional analysis of the endometrial cavity: how many dimensions should the ideal intrauterine device or system have?
title_full_unstemmed Dimensional analysis of the endometrial cavity: how many dimensions should the ideal intrauterine device or system have?
title_short Dimensional analysis of the endometrial cavity: how many dimensions should the ideal intrauterine device or system have?
title_sort dimensional analysis of the endometrial cavity: how many dimensions should the ideal intrauterine device or system have?
topic Short Report
url https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC5901129/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/29692635
http://dx.doi.org/10.2147/IJWH.S158281
work_keys_str_mv AT goldstucknormand dimensionalanalysisoftheendometrialcavityhowmanydimensionsshouldtheidealintrauterinedeviceorsystemhave