Literature DB >> 15205479

Deep pelvic endometriosis: MR imaging for diagnosis and prediction of extension of disease.

Marc Bazot1, Emile Darai, Roula Hourani, Isabelle Thomassin, Annie Cortez, Serge Uzan, Jean-Noël Buy.   

Abstract

PURPOSE: To prospectively evaluate the accuracy of magnetic resonance (MR) imaging for the preoperative diagnosis of deep pelvic endometriosis and extension of the disease.
MATERIALS AND METHODS: One hundred ninety-five patients (mean age, 34.2 years; range, 20-71 years) who were suspected of having pelvic endometriosis were recruited at two institutions. Two experienced radiologists evaluated the MR images independently. Deep pelvic endometriosis was defined as implants or tissue masses that appeared as hypointense areas and/or hyperintense foci on T1- or T2-weighted MR images in the following locations: torus uterinus, uterosacral ligaments (USLs), vagina, rectovaginal septum, rectosigmoid, and bladder. MR imaging results were compared with surgical and pathologic findings. Sensitivity, specificity, predictive values, and accuracy of MR imaging for prediction of deep pelvic endometriosis were assessed.
RESULTS: Pelvic endometriosis was confirmed at pathologic examination in 163 (83.6%) of 195 patients. Endometriomas, peritoneal lesions, and deep pelvic endometriosis were diagnosed on the basis of surgical findings, alone or combined with pathologic findings, in 111 (68.1%), 83 (50.9%), and 103 (63.2%) of 163 patients, respectively. Torus uterinus and USL were the most frequent sites of deep pelvic endometriosis. The sensitivity, specificity, positive and negative predictive values, and accuracy of MR imaging for deep pelvic endometriosis were 90.3% (93 of 103), 91% (84 of 92), 92.1% (93 of 101), 89% (84 of 94), and 90.8% (177 of 195), respectively. The sensitivity, specificity, and accuracy, respectively, of MR imaging for the diagnosis of endometriosis in specific sites were as follows: USL, 76% (57 of 75), 83.3% (100 of 120), and 80.5% (157 of 195); vagina, 76% (16 of 21), 95.4% (166 of 174), and 93.3% (182 of 195); rectovaginal septum, 80% (eight of 10), 97.8% (181 of 185), and 96.9% (189 of 195); rectosigmoid, 88% (53 of 60), 97.8% (132 of 135), and 94.9% (185 of 195); and bladder, 88% (14 of 16), 98.9% (177 of 179), and 97.9% (191 of 195).
CONCLUSION: MR imaging demonstrates high accuracy in prediction of deep pelvic endometriosis in specific locations. Copyright RSNA, 2004

Entities:  

Mesh:

Year:  2004        PMID: 15205479     DOI: 10.1148/radiol.2322030762

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Radiology        ISSN: 0033-8419            Impact factor:   11.105


  72 in total

1.  Laparoscopic versus laparotomic radical en bloc hysterectomy and colorectal resection for endometriosis.

Authors:  Emile Daraï; Marcos Ballester; Elisabeth Chereau; Charles Coutant; Roman Rouzier; Estelle Wafo
Journal:  Surg Endosc       Date:  2010-06-08       Impact factor: 4.584

2.  Indeterminate adnexal masses at ultrasound: effect of MRI imaging findings on diagnostic thinking and therapeutic decisions.

Authors:  Bianka Chilla; Nik Hauser; Gad Singer; Mafalda Trippel; Johannes M Froehlich; Rahel A Kubik-Huch
Journal:  Eur Radiol       Date:  2010-12-21       Impact factor: 5.315

3.  Diagnostic confidence analysis in the magnetic resonance imaging of ovarian and deep endometriosis: comparison with surgical results.

Authors:  Luca Saba; Rosa Sulcis; Gian Benedetto Melis; Giannina Ibba; Juan Luis Alcazar; Mario Piga; Stefano Guerriero
Journal:  Eur Radiol       Date:  2013-09-12       Impact factor: 5.315

4.  Cine MR imaging of uterine peristalsis in patients with endometriosis.

Authors:  Aki Kido; Kaori Togashi; Mizuki Nishino; Kanae Miyake; Takashi Koyama; Ryota Fujimoto; Kazuhiro Iwasaku; Shingo Fujii; Katsumi Hayakawa
Journal:  Eur Radiol       Date:  2006-11-22       Impact factor: 5.315

Review 5.  Diagnosis of endometriosis with imaging: a review.

Authors:  Karen Kinkel; Kathrin A Frei; Corinne Balleyguier; Charles Chapron
Journal:  Eur Radiol       Date:  2005-09-10       Impact factor: 5.315

6.  Contribution of diffusion-weighted MR imaging for predicting benignity of complex adnexal masses.

Authors:  Isabelle Thomassin-Naggara; Emile Daraï; Charles A Cuenod; Laure Fournier; Irwin Toussaint; Claude Marsault; Marc Bazot
Journal:  Eur Radiol       Date:  2009-02-13       Impact factor: 5.315

Review 7.  Imaging modalities for the non-invasive diagnosis of endometriosis.

Authors:  Vicki Nisenblat; Patrick M M Bossuyt; Cindy Farquhar; Neil Johnson; M Louise Hull
Journal:  Cochrane Database Syst Rev       Date:  2016-02-26

8.  Dynamic contrast-enhanced MR imaging to assess physiologic variations of myometrial perfusion.

Authors:  Isabelle Thomassin-Naggara; Daniel Balvay; Charles A Cuenod; Emile Daraï; Claude Marsault; Marc Bazot
Journal:  Eur Radiol       Date:  2009-10-10       Impact factor: 5.315

9.  Shining light in a dark landscape: MRI evaluation of unusual localization of endometriosis.

Authors:  Benedetta Gui; Anna Lia Valentini; Valeria Ninivaggi; Maura Miccò; Viola Zecchi; Pier Paolo Grimaldi; Francesco Cambi; Maurizio Guido; Lorenzo Bonomo
Journal:  Diagn Interv Radiol       Date:  2017 Jul-Aug       Impact factor: 2.630

10.  Appearance of abdominal wall endometriosis on MR imaging.

Authors:  Milou P H Busard; Velja Mijatovic; Cees van Kuijk; Peter G A Hompes; Jan Hein T M van Waesberghe
Journal:  Eur Radiol       Date:  2009-11-21       Impact factor: 5.315

View more

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.