Literature DB >> 18330616

MR imaging in the triage of pregnant patients with acute abdominal and pelvic pain.

Aytekin Oto1, Randy D Ernst, Labib M Ghulmiyyah, Thomas K Nishino, Douglas Hughes, Gregory Chaljub, George Saade.   

Abstract

PURPOSE: To retrospectively assess the performance of MR imaging in the evaluation and triage of pregnant patients presenting with acute abdominal or pelvic pain. METHOD AND MATERIALS: MRI studies of pregnant patients who were referred for acute abdominal pain between 2001 and 2007 were included. MR images were retrospectively reviewed and compared with surgical and pathologic findings and clinical follow-up data. Analysis of imaging findings included evaluation of the visceral organs, bowel and mesentery, appendix (for presence of appendicitis), ovaries (detection and adnexal masses were evaluated), focal inflammation, presence of abscesses, and any other abnormal findings.
RESULTS: A total of 118 pregnant patients were included. MR findings were inconclusive in 2 patients and were positive for acute appendicitis in 11 patients (n = 9 confirmed by surgery, n = 2 improved without surgery). One patient with inconclusive MR had surgically confirmed appendicitis; the other patient with inconclusive MR had surgically confirmed adnexal torsion. Other surgical/interventional diagnoses suggested by MR imaging were adnexal torsion (n = 4), abscess (n = 4), acute cholecystitis (n = 1), and gastric volvulus (n = 1). Two patients with MR diagnosis of torsion improved without surgery. One patient with MR diagnosis of abscess had biliary cystadenoma at surgery. The rest of the MR diagnoses above were confirmed surgically or interventionally. MR imaging was normal in 67 patients and demonstrated medically treatable etiology in 28 patients: adnexal lesions (n = 9), urinary pathology (n = 6), cholelithiasis (n = 4), degenerating fibroid (n = 3), DVT (n = 2), hernia (n = 1), colitis (n = 1), thick terminal ileum (n = 1), rectus hematoma (n = 1). Three of these patients had negative surgical exploration and one had adnexal mass excision during pregnancy. Other patients were discharged with medical treatment. The sensitivity, specificity, accuracy, positive predictive values (ppv), and negative predictive values (npv) of MR imaging for acute appendicitis, and surgical/ interventional diagnoses were 90.0% vs. 88.9%, 98.1% vs. 95.0%, 97.5% vs. 94.1%, 81.8% vs. 76.2%, 99.1% vs. 97.9%, respectively.
CONCLUSION: MR imaging is an excellent modality for diagnosis of acute appendicitis and exclusion of diseases requiring surgical/interventional treatment. Therefore MR imaging is useful for triage of pregnant patients with acute abdominal and pelvic pain.

Entities:  

Mesh:

Year:  2009        PMID: 18330616     DOI: 10.1007/s00261-008-9381-y

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Abdom Imaging        ISSN: 0942-8925


  21 in total

1.  Acute appendicitis and adverse pregnancy outcomes: a nationwide population-based study.

Authors:  Po-Li Wei; Joseph J Keller; Hung-Hua Liang; Herng-Ching Lin
Journal:  J Gastrointest Surg       Date:  2012-03-09       Impact factor: 3.452

2.  Acute abdominal and pelvic pain in pregnancy: ESUR recommendations.

Authors:  Gabriele Masselli; Lorenzo Derchi; Josephine McHugo; Andrea Rockall; Peter Vock; Michael Weston; John Spencer
Journal:  Eur Radiol       Date:  2013-08-30       Impact factor: 5.315

3.  [Acute appendicitis: a clinical diagnosis?].

Authors:  M Karul; M Avanesov; J Yamamura
Journal:  Radiologe       Date:  2012-12       Impact factor: 0.635

4.  Differential diagnoses of magnetic resonance imaging for suspected acute appendicitis in pregnant patients.

Authors:  Ji Yong Jung; Ji Ung Na; Sang Kuk Han; Pil Cho Choi; Jang Hee Lee; Dong Hyuk Shin
Journal:  World J Emerg Med       Date:  2018

Review 5.  Emergent MRI for acute abdominal pain in pregnancy-review of common pathology and imaging appearance.

Authors:  Arafat Ali; Katrina Beckett; Carl Flink
Journal:  Emerg Radiol       Date:  2020-01-05

6.  MRI of suspected appendicitis during pregnancy: interradiologist agreement, indeterminate interpretation and the meaning of non-visualization of the appendix.

Authors:  Richard Tsai; Constantine Raptis; Kathryn J Fowler; Joseph W Owen; Vincent M Mellnick
Journal:  Br J Radiol       Date:  2017-09-04       Impact factor: 3.039

7.  Optimizing imaging in suspected appendicitis (OPTIMAP-study): a multicenter diagnostic accuracy study of MRI in patients with suspected acute appendicitis. Study Protocol.

Authors:  Marjolein M N Leeuwenburgh; Wytze Laméris; Adrienne van Randen; Patrick M M Bossuyt; Marja A Boermeester; Jaap Stoker
Journal:  BMC Emerg Med       Date:  2010-10-20

8.  Diagnosis of a sigmoid volvulus in pregnancy: ultrasonography and magnetic resonance imaging findings.

Authors:  Stefano Palmucci; Maria Letizia Lanza; Fabrizio Gulino; Beniamino Scilletta; Giovanni Carlo Ettorre
Journal:  J Radiol Case Rep       Date:  2014-02-01

9.  Comparing the diagnostic performance of MRI versus CT in the evaluation of acute nontraumatic abdominal pain during pregnancy.

Authors:  Keren Tuvia Baron; Elizabeth Kagan Arleo; Christopher Robinson; Pina C Sanelli
Journal:  Emerg Radiol       Date:  2012-08-12

Review 10.  [Unclear abdominal pain in central emergency admissions. An algorithm].

Authors:  L Berner; H Dormann
Journal:  Med Klin Intensivmed Notfmed       Date:  2013-02-02       Impact factor: 0.840

View more

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.