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...
Autor principal: | |
---|---|
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 |