Case series: Comparison of contrast-enhanced genitosonography (ceGS) to fluoroscopy and cone-beam computed tomography in patients with urogenital sinus and the cloacal malformation

Jeanne S Chow; Harriet J Paltiel; Horacio M Padua; Erin McNamara; Belinda H Dickie

doi:10.1016/j.clinimag.2019.11.010

Case series: Comparison of contrast-enhanced genitosonography (ceGS) to fluoroscopy and cone-beam computed tomography in patients with urogenital sinus and the cloacal malformation

Clin Imaging. 2020 Apr;60(2):204-208. doi: 10.1016/j.clinimag.2019.11.010. Epub 2019 Nov 27.

Authors

Jeanne S Chow¹, Harriet J Paltiel², Horacio M Padua², Erin McNamara³, Belinda H Dickie⁴

Affiliations

¹ Boston Children's Hospital, 300 Longwood Avenue, Department of Radiology, Boston, MA 02115, United States of America. Electronic address: [email protected].
² Department of Radiology, United States of America.
³ Department of Urology, United States of America.
⁴ Department of Surgery, United States of America.

PMID: 31927495
DOI: 10.1016/j.clinimag.2019.11.010

Abstract

In this case series, contrast enhanced genitosonography is compared to genitography performed using fluoroscopy and cone-beam computed tomography in patients with urogenital sinus and the cloacal malformation. The method of contrast enhanced genitosonography is described, including contrast preparation, contrast administration, ultrasound imaging approaches, as well as the benefits and potential pitfalls of this technique compared to fluoroscopy and computed tomography.

Keywords: Cloacal malformation; Contrast-enhanced genitosonography; Disorders of sexual development; Genitography; Urogenital sinus.

MeSH terms

Animals
Cloaca / abnormalities*
Cone-Beam Computed Tomography
Female
Fluoroscopy
Humans
Male
Ultrasonography
Urogenital Abnormalities*