OBJECTIVE: To describe the computed tomography (CT) features of corpus luteal cysts. METHODS: We retrospectively identified 10 patients with a diagnosis of corpus luteal cysts established by ultrasound who had also undergone contemporaneous CT. A single attending radiologist, without knowledge of other clinical or radiologic findings, recorded the morphologic features of the cysts based on the CT images. RESULTS: The corpus luteal cyst seen at sonography was visible at CT in all 10 patients. All cysts were unilocular, with a mean density of 25 HU (range, 12 to 45). The mean maximum axial cyst diameter was 2.2 cm (range, 1.4 to 2.9). The mean cyst wall thickness was 3 mm (range, 2 to 4). All cyst walls were crenulated. Cyst wall enhancement was hyperdense in 6 cases, isodense in 3 cases, and hypodense in 1 case. Free fluid was seen in 9 of 10 patients. CONCLUSIONS: At CT, corpus luteal cysts are typically less than 3 cm in diameter and are characterized by a thick, crenulated, or hyperdense wall. Recognition of these CT findings should prevent misinterpretation or inappropriate management.
OBJECTIVE: To describe the computed tomography (CT) features of corpus luteal cysts. METHODS: We retrospectively identified 10 patients with a diagnosis of corpus luteal cysts established by ultrasound who had also undergone contemporaneous CT. A single attending radiologist, without knowledge of other clinical or radiologic findings, recorded the morphologic features of the cysts based on the CT images. RESULTS: The corpus luteal cyst seen at sonography was visible at CT in all 10 patients. All cysts were unilocular, with a mean density of 25 HU (range, 12 to 45). The mean maximum axial cyst diameter was 2.2 cm (range, 1.4 to 2.9). The mean cyst wall thickness was 3 mm (range, 2 to 4). All cyst walls were crenulated. Cyst wall enhancement was hyperdense in 6 cases, isodense in 3 cases, and hypodense in 1 case. Free fluid was seen in 9 of 10 patients. CONCLUSIONS: At CT, corpus luteal cysts are typically less than 3 cm in diameter and are characterized by a thick, crenulated, or hyperdense wall. Recognition of these CT findings should prevent misinterpretation or inappropriate management.
Authors: Silaja Yitta; Elizabeth V Mausner; Alice Kim; Danny Kim; James S Babb; Elizabeth M Hecht; Genevieve L Bennett Journal: Emerg Radiol Date: 2011-06-03
Authors: Sara Khademi; Antonio C Westphalen; Emily M Webb; Bonnie N Joe; Shiva Badiee; Randy A Hawkins; Fergus V Coakley Journal: Clin Imaging Date: 2009 Jan-Feb Impact factor: 1.605
Authors: Minkook Seo; Moon Hyung Department Of Radiology Eunpyeong St Mary's Hospital College Of Medicine The Catholic University Of Korea Seoul Republic Of Korea Catholic Smart Imaging Center Eunpyeong St Mary's Hospital College Of Medicine The Catholic University Of Korea Seoul Republic Of Korea Choi; Young Joon Lee; Seung Eun Jung; Sung Eun Rha Journal: Diagn Interv Radiol Date: 2021-07 Impact factor: 2.630