OBJECTIVE: To evaluate and compare the diagnostic accuracy of magnetic resonance imaging (MRI), transvaginal ultrasonography (TVS), hysterosonographic examination (HSE), and hysteroscopy in the evaluation of the uterine cavity. DESIGN: Independent double-blind study. SETTING:University medical hospital. PATIENT(S): One hundred six consecutive premenopausal women who underwent hysterectomy for benign diseases. INTERVENTION(S): Results of MRI, TVS, HSE, and hysteroscopy were compared with the results of histopathologic examination at hysterectomy (the gold standard). RESULT(S): The overall sensitivity was MRI 0.76, TVS 0.69, HSE 0.83, and hysteroscopy 0.84. The specificity was MRI 0.92, TVS 0.83, HSE 0.90, and hysteroscopy 0.88 (MRI, HSE, hysteroscopy vs. TVS <0.05). Polyps were missed in 9 of 12 cases at MRI, 7 at TVS, 4 at HSE, and 2 at hysteroscopy (MRI vs. hysteroscopy, and TVS vs. hysteroscopy <0.05). The sensitivity for identification of submucous myomas was MRI 1.0, TVS 0.83, HSE 0.90, and hysteroscopy 0.82; the specificity was MRI 0.91, TVS 0.90, HSE 0.89, and hysteroscopy 0.87 (MRI vs. TVS, and MRI vs. hysteroscopy). Magnetic resonance imaging was significantly more precise than TVS, HSE, and hysteroscopy in determining submucous myoma in-growth (2-way ANOVA <0.05). CONCLUSION(S): For exclusion of abnormalities in the uterine cavity, MRI, HSE, and hysteroscopy were equally effective and slightly superior to TVS. Magnetic resonance imaging and TVS missed endometrial abnormalities such as polyps, but MRI and HSE were most accurate for the evaluation of submucous myomas, and MRI was superior in evaluation of exact submucous myoma in-growth.
RCT Entities:
OBJECTIVE: To evaluate and compare the diagnostic accuracy of magnetic resonance imaging (MRI), transvaginal ultrasonography (TVS), hysterosonographic examination (HSE), and hysteroscopy in the evaluation of the uterine cavity. DESIGN: Independent double-blind study. SETTING: University medical hospital. PATIENT(S): One hundred six consecutive premenopausal women who underwent hysterectomy for benign diseases. INTERVENTION(S): Results of MRI, TVS, HSE, and hysteroscopy were compared with the results of histopathologic examination at hysterectomy (the gold standard). RESULT(S): The overall sensitivity was MRI 0.76, TVS 0.69, HSE 0.83, and hysteroscopy 0.84. The specificity was MRI 0.92, TVS 0.83, HSE 0.90, and hysteroscopy 0.88 (MRI, HSE, hysteroscopy vs. TVS <0.05). Polyps were missed in 9 of 12 cases at MRI, 7 at TVS, 4 at HSE, and 2 at hysteroscopy (MRI vs. hysteroscopy, and TVS vs. hysteroscopy <0.05). The sensitivity for identification of submucous myomas was MRI 1.0, TVS 0.83, HSE 0.90, and hysteroscopy 0.82; the specificity was MRI 0.91, TVS 0.90, HSE 0.89, and hysteroscopy 0.87 (MRI vs. TVS, and MRI vs. hysteroscopy). Magnetic resonance imaging was significantly more precise than TVS, HSE, and hysteroscopy in determining submucous myoma in-growth (2-way ANOVA <0.05). CONCLUSION(S): For exclusion of abnormalities in the uterine cavity, MRI, HSE, and hysteroscopy were equally effective and slightly superior to TVS. Magnetic resonance imaging and TVS missed endometrial abnormalities such as polyps, but MRI and HSE were most accurate for the evaluation of submucous myomas, and MRI was superior in evaluation of exact submucous myoma in-growth.
Authors: Gary Levy; Micah J Hill; Torie C Plowden; William H Catherino; Alicia Y Armstrong Journal: Fertil Steril Date: 2012-11-29 Impact factor: 7.329
Authors: Eric D Levens; Robert Wesley; Ahalya Premkumar; Wendy Blocker; Lynnette K Nieman Journal: Am J Obstet Gynecol Date: 2009-03-09 Impact factor: 8.661
Authors: Kanchan Puri; Abimbola O Famuyide; Patricia J Erwin; Elizabeth A Stewart; Shannon K Laughlin-Tommaso Journal: Am J Obstet Gynecol Date: 2013-09-28 Impact factor: 8.661