Elvira Brătilă1, Diana Elena Comandaşu1, Ciprian Coroleucă1, Monica Mihaela Cîrstoiu2, Costin Berceanu3, Claudia Mehedintu4, Petre Bratila5, Simona Vladareanu6. 1. "Carol Davila" University of Medicine and Pharmacy, Bucharest, "St. Pantelimon" Emergency Clinical Hospital, Bucharest, Romania. 2. "Carol Davila" University of Medicine and Pharmacy, Bucharest, Emergency Universitary Hospital, Bucharest, Romania. 3. University of Medicine and Pharmacy, Craiova, Romania. 4. "Carol Davila" University of Medicine and Pharmacy, Bucharest, "Nicolae Malaxa" Clinical Hospital, Bucharest, Romania. claudiamehedintu@yahoo.com. 5. "Carol Davila" University of Medicine and Pharmacy, Bucharest, "Euroclinic" Minimally Invasive and Reconstructive Hospital, Bucharest, Romania. 6. "Carol Davila" University of Medicine and Pharmacy, Bucharest, "Elias" Emergency Clinical Hospital, Bucharest, Romania.
Abstract
AIMS: The aim of the study was to evaluate the diagnostic ability of sonovaginography (SVG) with ultrasound gel in patients with endometriosis. MATERIAL AND METHODS: We conducted a multicentre prospective study, which included 193 patients with symptoms highly suggestive for endometriosis. All patients were investigated by transvaginal sonography and SVG with gel and afterwards underwent laparoscopic surgery. For each category of endometriotic lesions investigated, we calculated and compared the sensitivity, specificity, positive predictive value and negative predictive value of the imagisticinvestigations used. RESULTS: In the case of endometriotic lesions of the uterosacral ligaments, SVG with gel had a sensitivity of 78.5% and a specificity of 96% (p=ns). The lesions of the vagina and rectovaginal septum were diagnosed with a sensitivity of 79%, respectively 94% (p=ns), obtaining a specificity of 99%, respectively of 97% (p=0.007). The lesions of the Douglas pouch were identified with a sensitivity of 81% (p=0.015), and those of the rectosigmoid with a 94% sensitivity (p=0.010). We obtained lower sensitivity (67%) in detecting the lesions of the urinary bladder (p=ns). CONCLUSIONS: SGV with ultrasound gel represents a useful investigation tool for the evaluation of endometriotic lesions in the posterior pelvic compartment.
AIMS: The aim of the study was to evaluate the diagnostic ability of sonovaginography (SVG) with ultrasound gel in patients with endometriosis. MATERIAL AND METHODS: We conducted a multicentre prospective study, which included 193 patients with symptoms highly suggestive for endometriosis. All patients were investigated by transvaginal sonography and SVG with gel and afterwards underwent laparoscopic surgery. For each category of endometriotic lesions investigated, we calculated and compared the sensitivity, specificity, positive predictive value and negative predictive value of the imagisticinvestigations used. RESULTS: In the case of endometriotic lesions of the uterosacral ligaments, SVG with gel had a sensitivity of 78.5% and a specificity of 96% (p=ns). The lesions of the vagina and rectovaginal septum were diagnosed with a sensitivity of 79%, respectively 94% (p=ns), obtaining a specificity of 99%, respectively of 97% (p=0.007). The lesions of the Douglas pouch were identified with a sensitivity of 81% (p=0.015), and those of the rectosigmoid with a 94% sensitivity (p=0.010). We obtained lower sensitivity (67%) in detecting the lesions of the urinary bladder (p=ns). CONCLUSIONS: SGV with ultrasound gel represents a useful investigation tool for the evaluation of endometriotic lesions in the posterior pelvic compartment.