PURPOSE: Determining if Magnetic Resonance Imaging (MRI) accuracy in diagnosing endometriosis is related to radiologist's expertise. METHODS AND MATERIALS: Written informed consent was obtained from all patients. This study is compliant to STARD method. Thirty patients (mean age 34; range 21-45 years) who had undergone MRI study for suspected endometriosis underwent surgery were retrospectively evaluated. MRI at 1.5T was performed with SE and TSE sequences, T1 and T2-weighted with and without fat suppression. Four localizations were analyzed: ovary, uterosacral ligaments (USL), vaginal fornix and Rectum\Sigma\Douglas (R.S.D.). One radiologist evaluated each dataset; sensitivity, specificity, PPV and NPV, accuracy, LR+ and LR- were calculated according to the surgical results (first analysis). Dataset were then re-analyzed 12 months (second analysis) and 24 months (third analysis) later. McNemar test was applied to determine differences between the three analysis. RESULTS: Sensitivity, specificity and accuracy for the ovary at the first analysis were 88.9%, 87% and 88%, at the second 92.6%, 87% and 90% whereas at the third 92.6%, 91.3% and 92%. Sensitivity, specificity and accuracy for the USLs at the first analysis were 62.5%, 76.9% and 70%, at the second 72%, 80.8% and 76% whereas at the third 80%, 84.6% and 82%. Sensitivity, specificity and accuracy for the vaginal fornix at the first analysis were 63.2%, 64.5% and 64%, at the second 73.7%, 77.4% and 76% whereas at the third 73.7%, 83.9% and 80%. Sensitivity, specificity and accuracy for the R.S.D. at the first analysis were 39.1%, 81.5% and 62%, at the second 62.5%, 85.2% and 76% whereas at the third 73.9%, 88.9% and 82%. McNemar test indicated a significant statistical difference in sensitivity in detecting nodules of endometriosis in R.S.D. between first and third analysis (p=0.0215). The mean review time decreased (p=0.0001). CONCLUSIONS: Accuracy of MRI in diagnosing endometriosis increased with radiologist's expertise and the improvement was statistically significant in determining RSD involvement.
PURPOSE: Determining if Magnetic Resonance Imaging (MRI) accuracy in diagnosing endometriosis is related to radiologist's expertise. METHODS AND MATERIALS: Written informed consent was obtained from all patients. This study is compliant to STARD method. Thirty patients (mean age 34; range 21-45 years) who had undergone MRI study for suspected endometriosis underwent surgery were retrospectively evaluated. MRI at 1.5T was performed with SE and TSE sequences, T1 and T2-weighted with and without fat suppression. Four localizations were analyzed: ovary, uterosacral ligaments (USL), vaginal fornix and Rectum\Sigma\Douglas (R.S.D.). One radiologist evaluated each dataset; sensitivity, specificity, PPV and NPV, accuracy, LR+ and LR- were calculated according to the surgical results (first analysis). Dataset were then re-analyzed 12 months (second analysis) and 24 months (third analysis) later. McNemar test was applied to determine differences between the three analysis. RESULTS: Sensitivity, specificity and accuracy for the ovary at the first analysis were 88.9%, 87% and 88%, at the second 92.6%, 87% and 90% whereas at the third 92.6%, 91.3% and 92%. Sensitivity, specificity and accuracy for the USLs at the first analysis were 62.5%, 76.9% and 70%, at the second 72%, 80.8% and 76% whereas at the third 80%, 84.6% and 82%. Sensitivity, specificity and accuracy for the vaginal fornix at the first analysis were 63.2%, 64.5% and 64%, at the second 73.7%, 77.4% and 76% whereas at the third 73.7%, 83.9% and 80%. Sensitivity, specificity and accuracy for the R.S.D. at the first analysis were 39.1%, 81.5% and 62%, at the second 62.5%, 85.2% and 76% whereas at the third 73.9%, 88.9% and 82%. McNemar test indicated a significant statistical difference in sensitivity in detecting nodules of endometriosis in R.S.D. between first and third analysis (p=0.0215). The mean review time decreased (p=0.0001). CONCLUSIONS: Accuracy of MRI in diagnosing endometriosis increased with radiologist's expertise and the improvement was statistically significant in determining RSD involvement.
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
Authors: Doenja M J Lambregts; Miriam M van Heeswijk; Andrea Delli Pizzi; Saskia G C van Elderen; Luisa Andrade; Nicky H G M Peters; Peter A M Kint; Margreet Osinga-de Jong; Shandra Bipat; Rik Ooms; Max J Lahaye; Monique Maas; Geerard L Beets; Frans C H Bakers; Regina G H Beets-Tan Journal: Eur Radiol Date: 2017-04-13 Impact factor: 5.315
Authors: Andreas Boss; Patrick Imesch; Laurin Burla; David Scheiner; Andreas M Hötker; Andreas Meier; Daniel Fink Journal: Arch Gynecol Obstet Date: 2020-11-22 Impact factor: 2.344
Authors: Francesco Manti; Caterina Battaglia; Iennarella Bruno; Michele Ammendola; Giuseppe Navarra; Giuseppe Currò; Domenico Laganà Journal: Front Surg Date: 2022-06-28
Authors: I Juhasz-Böss; M W Laschke; F Müller; P Rosenbaum; S Baum; E F Solomayer; U Ulrich Journal: Geburtshilfe Frauenheilkd Date: 2014-08 Impact factor: 2.915