Literature DB >> 21813257

Deeply infiltrating endometriosis: evaluation of retro-cervical space on MRI after vaginal opacification.

Valeria Fiaschetti1, Sonia Crusco, Alessandro Meschini, Valentina Cama, Livio Di Vito, Massimiliano Marziali, Emilio Piccione, Ferdinando Calabria, Giovanni Simonetti.   

Abstract

OBJECTIVES: To prospectively investigate diagnostic value and tolerability of MRI after intra-vaginal gel opacification for diagnosis and preoperative assessment of deeply infiltrating endometriosis.
METHODS: Sixty-three women with clinical suspicion of deeply infiltrating endometriosis were previously examined with trans-vaginal ultrasonography and then with MRI pre and post administration of vaginal gel. We evaluated the tolerability of this procedure with a scoring scale from 0 to 3. We also assessed with a score from 1 to 4 the visibility of four regions: Douglas-pouch, utero-sacral-ligaments, posterior-vaginal-fornix and recto-vaginal-septum. All patients underwent laparoscopic surgery after MRI.
RESULTS: Five patients considered procedure intolerable. Visibility of utero-sacral-ligaments and posterior-vaginal-fornix showed to be increased with gel (p<0.001). In 57 out of 80 patients the MRI has allowed us to diagnose deeply infiltrating endometriosis. Overall, the percentages of MRI-sensitivity, specificity, positive predictive value and negative predictive value were respectively 67.8%, 95.3%, 89.4 and 83.5% without gel, and 90.8%, 94.6%, 90.8% and 94.6% with gel; trans-vaginal ultrasonography sensitivity, specificity, positive predictive value and negative predictive value were 57.5%, 96.6%, 90.9% and 79.5%. In evaluation of utero-sacral-ligaments trans-vaginal ultrasonography, MRI without gel and with gel sensitivity was respectively 61.9%, 47.6% and 81%; for recto-vaginal-septum these values were 12.5%, 68.7% and 93.7%; for pouch of Douglas 82%, 87% and 97.4%; finally for posterior-vaginal-fornix 27.3%, 36.4% and 81.8%.
CONCLUSIONS: MRI with gel opacification of vagina should be recommended for suspicion of deep infiltrating endometriosis, in particular for the added value in evaluation of recto-vaginal septum, utero-sacral ligaments and posterior vaginal fornix.
Copyright © 2011 Elsevier Ireland Ltd. All rights reserved.

Entities:  

Mesh:

Substances:

Year:  2011        PMID: 21813257     DOI: 10.1016/j.ejrad.2011.06.058

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Eur J Radiol        ISSN: 0720-048X            Impact factor:   3.528


  10 in total

Review 1.  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

Review 2.  MRI for the diagnosis and staging of deeply infiltrating endometriosis: a national survey of BSGE accredited endometriosis centres and review of the literature.

Authors:  Marianne Wild; Shikha Pandhi; John Rendle; Ian Swift; Emmanuel Ofuasia
Journal:  Br J Radiol       Date:  2020-07-30       Impact factor: 3.039

Review 3.  MRI in the Diagnosis of Endometriosis and Related Diseases.

Authors:  Aki Kido; Yuki Himoto; Yusaku Moribata; Yasuhisa Kurata; Yuji Nakamoto
Journal:  Korean J Radiol       Date:  2022-03-08       Impact factor: 3.500

4.  Meta-analysis and systematic review to determine the optimal imaging modality for the detection of uterosacral ligaments/torus uterinus, rectovaginal septum and vaginal deep endometriosis.

Authors:  B Gerges; W Li; M Leonardi; B W Mol; G Condous
Journal:  Hum Reprod Open       Date:  2021-11-04

5.  Indirect and atypical imaging signals of endometriosis: A wide range of manifestations.

Authors:  A Vigueras Smith; R Cabrera; C Trippia; M Tessman Zomer; W Kondo; H Ferreira; L Carttaxo Da Silva; R Sumak
Journal:  Facts Views Vis Obgyn       Date:  2021-12

Review 6.  Transvaginal Ultrasound vs. Magnetic Resonance Imaging (MRI) Value in Endometriosis Diagnosis.

Authors:  Alexandra Baușic; Ciprian Coroleucă; Cătălin Coroleucă; Diana Comandașu; Roxana Matasariu; Andrei Manu; Francesca Frîncu; Claudia Mehedințu; Elvira Brătilă
Journal:  Diagnostics (Basel)       Date:  2022-07-21

7.  Evaluation of the usefulness of the MRI jelly method for diagnosing complete cul-de-sac obliteration.

Authors:  Iwaho Kikuchi; Ryohei Kuwatsuru; Kana Yamazaki; Jun Kumakiri; Yoichi Aoki; Satoru Takeda
Journal:  Biomed Res Int       Date:  2014-04-10       Impact factor: 3.411

8.  European society of urogenital radiology (ESUR) guidelines: MR imaging of pelvic endometriosis.

Authors:  M Bazot; N Bharwani; C Huchon; K Kinkel; T M Cunha; A Guerra; L Manganaro; L Buñesch; A Kido; K Togashi; I Thomassin-Naggara; A G Rockall
Journal:  Eur Radiol       Date:  2016-12-05       Impact factor: 5.315

9.  Pelvic MRI: Is Endovaginal or Rectal Filling Needed?

Authors:  Constance Engelaere; Edouard Poncelet; Carole Durot; Anthony Dohan; Pascal Rousset; Christine Hoeffel
Journal:  Korean J Radiol       Date:  2018-04-06       Impact factor: 3.500

Review 10.  Imaging Modalities for Diagnosis of Deep Pelvic Endometriosis: Comparison between Trans-Vaginal Sonography, Rectal Endoscopy Sonography and Magnetic Resonance Imaging. A Head-to-Head Meta-Analysis.

Authors:  Marco Noventa; Marco Scioscia; Michele Schincariol; Francesco Cavallin; Giovanni Pontrelli; Bruna Virgilio; Salvatore Giovanni Vitale; Antonio Simone Laganà; Francesco Dessole; Erich Cosmi; Donato D'Antona; Alessandra Andrisani; Carlo Saccardi; Amerigo Vitagliano; Guido Ambrosini
Journal:  Diagnostics (Basel)       Date:  2019-12-17
  10 in total

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.