Translabial ultrasound: “three tracks” technique




transperineal ultrasound, translabial ultrasound, TPUS, TVUS, TLUS, “three tracks” technique


Introduction: there are various options for the application of an ultrasound transducer in transperineal sonography procedure (TPUS), starting from percutaneous scanning of the perineum area by sector transducers and ending with the use of transalabial (TLUS), transvaginal (TVUS) and transrectal access by the intracavitary transducers. In all these cases, it is necessary to identify the relationships of pelvic organs. The ultrasonic technique of the “three tracks” (TTT) allows real-time evaluation of the spatial ratio of the urethra, vagina and rectum, as well as adjacent subjects of the pelvis, visualizing them simultaneously in the same scanning plane.

Objective: to present the “three track» technique used in the conduct of translabial ultrasonography, and to study the results of revealing the pathology in lower pelvis in comparison with routine transvaginal ultrasonography (TVUS).

Participants, settings, methods: the study was conducted between January 18, 2016 and November 27, 2017 in the clinic for reproductive medicine “Remedi” (Odesa). Informed consent to the investigation was obtained from all females. 70 patients of the main group underwent translabial ultrasonography in the “three track” technique (TLUS + TTT). 71 women of comparative group underwent a routine transvaginal ultrasonography.

Results and discussion: visualization of three tracks: urethra, vagina and rectum in one scan plane was achieved in 65 patients of the main group (93%). In addition, in the main group, approximately twice as often as in the comparison group, a rare pathology of the lower pelvis, such as Gartner duct cysts, the Bartolin cysts, the deep endometriosis of the rectovaginal septum and unclassified cysts of the vagina, were found. However, the insufficient number of obtained results does not allow confirming their reliability.

Conclusion: the using of TTT during TLUS, extends the diagnostic opportunities of the examiner in the evaluation of the relationship of adjacent organs and tissues in the pelvic floor and lower pelvis. The method requires further research and can be used as an additional bonus to improve for accuracy and safety of diagnostic and surgical gynecological practice.

There is no conflict of interest to declare.

Author Biography

В. В. Дощечкин, “Remedi”, Odesa

obstetrician gynecologist high category, head of the clinic of reproductive medicine


  1. Davillas, N.E., Spyrou, C. “Transperineal prostatography for the diagnosis of cancer of the prostate.” J Urol Nephrol Paris 82.1–2 (1976): 77–80.
  2. Richey, S.D., Ramin, K.D., Roberts, S.W., et al. “The correlation between transperineal sonography and digital examination in the evaluation of the third-trimester cervix.” Obstet Gynecol 85.5 Pt 1 (1995): 745–8.
  3. Park, B.K. “Ultrasound-guided genitourinary interventions: principles and techniques.” Ultrasonography 36.4 (2017): 336–48. DOI: 10.14366/usg.17026
  4. Huibo Lian, Junlong Zhuang, Wei Wang, et al. “Assessment of free-hand transperineal targeted prostate biopsy using multiparametric magnetic resonance imaging-transrectal ultrasound fusion in Chinese men with prior negative biopsy and elevated prostate-specific antigen.” BMC Urol 17 (2017): 52. DOI: 10.1186/s12894-017-0241-3
  5. Demidov, V.N., Bychkov, P.A., Longvinenko, A.V., Voevodin, S.M. Ultrasound biometry. Reference tables and equations. Clinical lectures on ultrasound diagnostics in perinatology. Ed. by M.V. Medvedev, B.I. Zykin. Moscow. Diagnosis (1990): 83–92.
  6. Sivyer, P. “Pelvic ultrasound in women.” World J Surg 24.2 (2000):188–97.
  7. Owen, J., Neely, C., Northen, A. “Transperineal versus endovaginal ultrasonographic examination of the cervix in the midtrimester: a blinded comparison.” Am J Obstet Gynecol 181.4 (1999): 780–3.
  8. Cicero, S., Skentou, C., Souka, A., et al. “Cervical length at 22–24 weeks of gestation: comparison of transvaginal and transperineal-translabial ultrasonography.” Ultrasound Obstet Gynecol 17.4 (2001): 335–40.
  9. Ozdemir, I., Demirci, F., Yucel, O., Aust, N.Z.J. “Transperineal versus transvaginal ultrasonographic evaluation of the cervix at each trimester in normal pregnant women.” Obstet Gynaecol 45.3 (2005): 191–4.
  10. Zilianti, M., Azuaga, A., Calderon, F., Redondo, C. “Transperineal sonography in second trimester to term pregnancy and early labor.” J Ultrasound Med 10.9 (1991): 481–5.
  11. Benediktsdottir, S., Eggebo, T.M., Salvesen, K.A. “Agreement between transperineal ultrasound measurements and digital examinations of cervical dilatation during labor.” BMC Pregnancy Childbirth 15 (2015): 273. DOI: 10.1186/s12884-015-0704-z
  12. Rivaux, G., Dedet, B., Delarue, E., et al. “The diagnosis of fetal head engagement: transperineal ultrasound, a new useful tool?” Gynecol Obstet Fertil 40.3 (2012): 148–52. DOI: 10.1016/j.gyobfe.2011.07.012
  13. Simon, E.G., Arthuis, C.J., Perrotin, F. “Engagement of fetal head: what have we learnt from ultrasound?” Gynecol Obstet Fertil 42.6 (2014):375–7. DOI: 10.1016/j.gyobfe.2014.04.010
  14. Barbera, A., Pombar, X., Perugino, G., et al. “A new method to assess fetal head descent in labor with transperineal ultrasound.” Ultrasound Obstet Gynecol 33 (2009): 313–9.
  15. Wiafe, Y.A., Whitehead, B., Venables, H., Nakua, E.K. “The effectiveness of intrapartum ultrasonography in assessing cervical dilatation, head station and position: A systematic review and meta-analysis.” Ultrasound 24.4 (2016): 222–32. DOI: 10.1177/1742271X16673124
  16. Hertzberg, B.S., Bowie, J.D., Carroll, B.A., et al. “Diagnosis of placenta previa during the third trimester: role of transperineal sonography.” AJR Am J Roentgenol 159.1 (1992): 83–7.
  17. Zilianti, M. “Transperineal sonography in the diagnosis of placenta previa.” AJR Am J Roentgenol 162.5 (1994): 1251–2.
  18. Adeyomoye, A.A., Ola, E.R., Arogundade, R.A., et al. “Comparison of the accuracy of trans-abdominal sonography (TAS) and transperineal sonography (TPS) in the diagnosis of Placenta Praevia.” Niger Postgrad Med J 13.1 (2006): 21–5.
  19. Antonio Sainz, J., Borrero, C., Aquise, A., et al. “Intrapartum translabial ultrasound with pushing used to predict the difficulty in vacuum-assisted delivery of fetuses in non-occiput posterior position.” J Matern Fetal Neonatal Med 29.20 (2016): 3400–5. DOI: 10.3109/14767058.2015.1130816
  20. Kokinidis, I., Dimitrov, A., Karagozov, I. “Translabial sonography of the lower uterine segment.” Akush Ginekol (Sofiia) 38.3 (1999):18–20.
  21. Ki Hoon Ahn, Min-Jeong Oh. “Intrapartum ultrasound: A useful method for evaluating labor progress and predicting operative vaginal delivery.” Obstet Gynecol Sci 57.6 (2014): 427–35. DOI: 10.5468/ogs.2014.57.6.427
  22. Blasi, I., Fuchs, I., D’Amico, R., et al. “Intrapartum translabial three-dimensional ultrasound visualization of levator trauma.” Ultrasound Obstet Gynecol 37.1 (2011):88–92. DOI: 10.1002/uog.8818
  23. Fleischer, A.C., Burnett, L.S., Jones, H.W. 3rd, Cullinan, J.A. “Transrectal and transperineal sonography during guided intrauterine procedures.” J Ultrasound Med 14.2 (1995): 135–8.
  24. Castineiras, J., Varo, C., Castro, C., et al. “Complications of ultrasound-guided transperineal puncture biopsy of the prostate.” Actas Urol Esp 19.7 (1995): 544–8.
  25. Wang, Z., Hu, L., Jin, X., et al. “Evaluation of postoperative anal functions using endoanal ultrasonography and anorectal manometry in children with congenital anorectal malformations.” J Pediatr Surg 51.3 (2016): 416–20. DOI: 10.1016/j.jpedsurg.2015.09.024
  26. Teele, R.L., Share, J.C. “Transperineal sonography in children.” AJR Am J Roentgenol 168.5 (1997): 1263–7.
  27. Mate, A., Bargiela, A., Mosteiro, S., et al. “Contrast ultrasound of the urethra in children.” Eur Radiol 13.7 (2003): 1534–7.
  28. Son, J.K., Taylor, G.A. “Transperineal ultrasonography.” Pediatr Radiol 44.2 (2014): 193–201. DOI: 10.1007/s00247-013-2789-8
  29. de Jesus, L.E., Fazecas, T., Ribeiro, B.G., Dekermacher, S. “Transperineal Ultrasound as a Tool to Plan Surgical Strategies in Pediatric Urology: Back to the Future?” Urology 104 (2017): 175–8. DOI: 10.1016/j.urology.2017.02.030
  30. Piloni, V. “Dynamic imaging of pelvic floor with transperineal sonography.” Tech Coloproctol 5.2 (2001): 103–5.
  31. Belyaeva, L.E., Sobolevskaya, Y.G., Sadovnikov, V.I., et al. “Transperineal ultrasound in assessing pelvic floor condition in women.” Ultrasound and functional diagnostics 2 (2013): 71–7.
  32. Lone, F., Sultan, A.H., Stankiewicz, A., Thakar, R. “Interobserver agreement of multicompartment ultrasound in the assessment of pelvic floor anatomy.” Br J Radiol 89.1059 (2016): 20150704. DOI: 10.1259/bjr.20150704
  33. Notten, K.J.B., Vergeldt, T.F.M., van Kuijk, S.M.J., et al. “Diagnostic Accuracy and Clinical Implications of Translabial Ultrasound for the Assessment of Levator Ani Defects and Levator Ani Biometry in Women With Pelvic Organ Prolapse: A Systematic Review.” Female Pelvic Med Reconstr Surg 23.6 (2017): 420–8. DOI: 10.1097/SPV.0000000000000402
  34. Deepti Jain. “Perineal scar endometriosis: a comparison of two cases.” BMJ Case Rep (2013). DOI: 10.1136/bcr-2013-010051
  35. Troiano, R.N., McCarthy, S.M. “Mullerian duct anomalies: imaging and clinical issues.” Radiology 233 (2004): 19–34. DOI: 10.1148/radiol.2331020777
  36. Hoogendam, J.P., Smink, M. “Gartner’s Duct Cyst.” N Engl J Med 376.14 (2017): e27. DOI: 10.1056/NEJMicm1609983
  37. Najjari, L., Hennemann, J., Larscheid, P., et al. “Perineal Ultrasound as a Complement to POP-Q in the Assessment of Cystoceles.” Biomed Res Int 2014 (2014): 740925. DOI: 10.1155/2014/740925
  38. Sperling, D.C., Needleman, L., Eschelman, D.J. “Deep pelvic abscesses: transperineal US-guided drainage.” Radiology 208.1 (1998): 111–5.
  39. Reuter, K.L., Young, S.B., Colby, J. “Transperineal sonography in the assessment of a urethral diverticulum.” J Clin Ultrasound 20.3 (1992): 221–3.
  40. Trombetta, C., Lissiani, A., Moro, U., Belgrano, E. “Infrequent application of intraoperative ultrasonography in urology.” Arch Ital Urol Androl 68 Suppl 5 (1996): 31–6.
  41. Bogusiewicz, M. “Ultrasound imaging in urogynecology – state of the art 2016.” Prz Menopauzalny 15.3 (2016): 123–32. DOI: 10.5114/pm.2016.63060
  42. Pietrus, M., Pityński, K., Bałajewicz-Nowak, M., et al. “Translabial ultrasonography in pelvic floor prolapse and urinary incontinence diagnostics.” Ginekol Pol 83.9 (2012): 694–9.
  43. Hennemann, J., Kennes, L.N., Maass, N., Najjari, L. “Evaluation of established and new reference lines for the standardization of transperineal ultrasound.” Ultrasound Obstet Gynecol 44.5 (2014): 610–6. DOI: 10.1002/uog.13318
  44. Benacerraf, B.R., Shipp, T.D., Bromley, B. “Is a full bladder still necessary for pelvic sonography?” J Ultrasound Med 19 (2000): 237.
  45. Martensson, O., Duchek, M. “Translabial ultrasonography with pulsed colour-Doppler in the diagnosis of female urethral diverticula.” Scand J Urol Nephrol 28.1 (1994): 101–4.
  46. American Institute of Ultrasound in Medicine. AIUM Practice Parameter for the Performance of Ultrasound of the Female Pelvis (2014). Available from: [].
  47. American Institute of Ultrasound in Medicine. AIUM Practice Parameter for Ultrasound Examinations in Reproductive Medicine and Infertility (2017). Available from: [].
  48. Society and College of Radiographers and British Medical Ultrasound Society. Guidelines for professional ultrasound practice (2015). Available from: [].



How to Cite

Дощечкин, В. В. (2017). Translabial ultrasound: “three tracks” technique. REPRODUCTIVE ENDOCRINOLOGY, (38), 53–57.



Interdisciplinary problems