These tools will no longer be maintained as of December 31, 2024. Archived website can be found here. PubMed4Hh GitHub repository can be found here. Contact NLM Customer Service if you have questions.


Pubmed for Handhelds

PUBMED FOR HANDHELDS

Search MEDLINE/PubMed

  • Title: Staging of pelvic endometriosis using magnetic resonance imaging compared with the laparoscopic classification of the American Fertility Society: a prospective study.
    Author: Zanardi R, Del Frate C, Zuiani C, Del Frate G, Bazzocchi M.
    Journal: Radiol Med; 2003 Apr; 105(4):326-38. PubMed ID: 12835626.
    Abstract:
    PURPOSE: To introduce a staging of pelvic endometriosis based on Magnetic Resonance Imaging (MRI) features, compared with the American Fertility Society (AFS) laparoscopic classification. MATERIALS AND METHODS: Thirty-five consecutive females with clinically suspected endometriosis underwent MRI examination using TSE T1, T2W, and SE FAT-SAT T1W sequences, to demonstrate the presence of endometriomas and pelvic implants. Laparoscopy was performed within two weeks (mean 8 days) of the examination. A radiologist experienced in pelvic pathology evaluated the presence of endometriomas and implants and calculated a score to classify endometriosis in four classes, comparable with those of AFS laparoscopic staging. The MRI score was based on size, edges, wall thickness, septations, signal intensity on T2-weighted images of endometriomas and presence of pelvic implants. The concordance between MRI and laparoscopic classification was evaluated using k-statistics. RESULTS: Laparoscopy confirmed 47/48 endometriomas, ranging in size from 10 to 62 mm, detected by MRI, with only one false positive due to an hemorrhagic corpus luteum. Nevertheless, 2 intra-ovarian endometriomas were detected by laparoscopy only thanks MRI guidance. Implants were discovered in 17/30 patients with MRI, laparoscopically in 18/30. MRI detected 46 endometrial implants out of 57 detected by laparoscopy (80.7%): 17/46 implants were directly confirmed by laparoscopy, 29/46 were indirectly confirmed by the presence of adhesions. As regards staging, there was agreement between the MRI and AFS classification in 33/35 patients with only two case of discordance (K= 0,892). CONCLUSIONS: Although MRI has limitations such as suboptimal depiction of small implants and adhesions, this technique is very useful for guiding laparoscopy. Moreover, the high level of agreement (96.6%) between the MRI staging proposed in this paper and laparoscopic classification demonstrates a further advantage of the use of MRI in the preoperative staging of endometriosis.
    [Abstract] [Full Text] [Related] [New Search]