AIM: To assess accuracy of magnetic resonance imaging (MRI) for the delineation of morphological abnormalities of the vagina in patients with congenital anomalies of the genito-urinary tract. MATERIALS AND METHODS: Fifty-one patients (median age 19 years; range 12-40 years) were studied. All were consecutively referred for MRI to assess genital tract anatomy, between 1996 and 2004, from a clinic specializing in congenital abnormalities of the urogenital tract. All patients were assessed clinically and underwent MRI. Images were reviewed retrospectively by an experienced radiologist. Where there was discordance between clinical and radiological findings a consensus diagnosis was achieved by the gynaecologists and radiologists reviewing all of the clinical and radiological evidence together, including assessment of vaginal length. RESULTS: The clinical data were incomplete for five women and the images non-diagnostic in two cases; consequently, 44 of 51 women had complete datasets and could be evaluated. Vaginas were abnormal in 30 of the 44 patients. There was discordance between the clinical and imaging findings at the initial review in three of the 44 cases (6.8%). After consensus review, and with the inclusion of measurement of the vaginal length on MRI, the MRI and clinical findings were concordant in all cases. The initial discordance was due to two vaginal dimples not being appreciated on MRI and one case in which presence of vaginal tissue proximal to a mid-segment obstruction was not appreciated clinically. CONCLUSION: MRI is an accurate method of imaging vaginal anomalies. However, to achieve reliable results the radiologist requires details of previous surgery and the vaginal length must be measured.
AIM: To assess accuracy of magnetic resonance imaging (MRI) for the delineation of morphological abnormalities of the vagina in patients with congenital anomalies of the genito-urinary tract. MATERIALS AND METHODS: Fifty-one patients (median age 19 years; range 12-40 years) were studied. All were consecutively referred for MRI to assess genital tract anatomy, between 1996 and 2004, from a clinic specializing in congenital abnormalities of the urogenital tract. All patients were assessed clinically and underwent MRI. Images were reviewed retrospectively by an experienced radiologist. Where there was discordance between clinical and radiological findings a consensus diagnosis was achieved by the gynaecologists and radiologists reviewing all of the clinical and radiological evidence together, including assessment of vaginal length. RESULTS: The clinical data were incomplete for five women and the images non-diagnostic in two cases; consequently, 44 of 51 women had complete datasets and could be evaluated. Vaginas were abnormal in 30 of the 44 patients. There was discordance between the clinical and imaging findings at the initial review in three of the 44 cases (6.8%). After consensus review, and with the inclusion of measurement of the vaginal length on MRI, the MRI and clinical findings were concordant in all cases. The initial discordance was due to two vaginal dimples not being appreciated on MRI and one case in which presence of vaginal tissue proximal to a mid-segment obstruction was not appreciated clinically. CONCLUSION: MRI is an accurate method of imaging vaginal anomalies. However, to achieve reliable results the radiologist requires details of previous surgery and the vaginal length must be measured.
Authors: Loes C M Bertens; Berna D L Broekhuizen; Christiana A Naaktgeboren; Frans H Rutten; Arno W Hoes; Yvonne van Mourik; Karel G M Moons; Johannes B Reitsma Journal: PLoS Med Date: 2013-10-15 Impact factor: 11.069