ReviewFrontiers in medicine2025
Diagnostic accuracy of three-dimensional transvaginal ultrasound for intrauterine adhesions: a systematic review and meta-analysis.
Review in Frontiers in medicine, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 1 paper.
What it found
Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.
The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.
The trial behind it
Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.
Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.
Who cites it
1 citing paper in PubMed.
- Successful early term pregnancy in a patient with an unresected partial septate uterus: A case report.Case reports in women's health · 2026Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
3 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Background: Intrauterine adhesions (IUA) are a common cause of menstrual abnormalities, infertility, and adverse pregnancy outcomes. Hysteroscopy is the diagnostic gold standard but is invasive and less accessible in some clinical settings. Three-dimensional transvaginal ultrasonography (3D-TVUS) offers a non-invasive alternative; however, its diagnostic accuracy for IUA remains uncertain. Objective: To systematically evaluate the diagnostic performance of 3D-TVUS for detecting IUA, using hysteroscopy as the reference standard. Methods: A systematic review and meta-analysis were conducted following PRISMA-DTA guidelines. PubMed, Wiley library, Web of Science, Cochrane Library, and major Chinese databases were searched up to August 1, 2025. Eligible diagnostic accuracy studies reported sensitivity, specificity, or data allowing construction of 2 × 2 tables. Two reviewers independently screened studies, extracted data, and assessed quality using QUADAS-2. A bivariate random-effects model was used to pool sensitivity, specificity, positive and negative likelihood ratios (PLR, NLR), diagnostic odds ratio (DOR), and hierarchical summary receiver operating characteristic (HSROC) curve. Results: Nine studies involving 2,830 participants were included. The pooled sensitivity was 0.86 (95% CI: 0.83-0.89) and specificity was 0.90 (95% CI: 0.87-0.92). The pooled PLR and NLR were 8.6 (95% CI: 6.2-11.9) and 0.16 (95% CI: 0.13-0.20), respectively. The pooled DOR was 53.2 (95% CI: 34.7-81.4). The HSROC curve yielded an area under the curve (AUC) of 0.94 (95% CI: 0.91-0.96), indicating high diagnostic accuracy. Fagan's nomogram demonstrated a substantial increase in post-test probability following a positive test result and a marked decrease following a negative result. Conclusion: 3D-TVUS demonstrates high sensitivity, specificity, and overall accuracy for diagnosing intrauterine adhesions, supporting its potential as a reliable, non-invasive first-line diagnostic tool. Further multicenter, prospective studies with standardized imaging protocols are warranted to validate these findings and optimize clinical application.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.