Recommendations for clinical practice. Non-echographic imaging of uterine fibroma;Imagerie non echographique des fibromes uterins

Journal de Gynecologie Obstetrique et Biologie de la Reproduction

Volumn 28, Issue 7, 1999, Pages 715-718

  Rouanet, J P ^a   Juhan, V ^b   Maubon, A ^c  

^a CMC Beausoleil   (France)

^b LIMOGES UNIVERSITY HOSPITAL   (France)

^c Chef de Clin Assitant des Hop   (France)

Author keywords

[No Author keywords available]

Indexed keywords

ADENOMYOSIS; ANATOMY; ARTICLE; CLINICAL PRACTICE; CLINICAL PROTOCOL; DIAGNOSTIC IMAGING; DIFFERENTIAL DIAGNOSIS; ECHOGRAPHY; HISTOLOGY; HUMAN; HYSTEROGRAPHY; LEIOMYOSARCOMA; NUCLEAR MAGNETIC RESONANCE IMAGING; UTERUS MYOMA; ADULT; FEMALE; PATHOLOGY; REVIEW; UTERUS CANCER;

ADULT; DIAGNOSIS, DIFFERENTIAL; DIAGNOSTIC IMAGING; FEMALE; HUMANS; LEIOMYOSARCOMA; MAGNETIC RESONANCE IMAGING; UTERINE NEOPLASMS;

EID: 0033397447     PISSN: 03682315     EISSN: None     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: None     Document Type: Article

References (14)

1. Dudiak CM, Turner DA, Patel SK, Archie JT, Silver B, Norusis M. Uterine leiomyomas in the infertile patient preoperative localization with MR imaging versus US and hysterosalpingography. Radiology 1988; 167: 627-630.
2. Hricak H, Tscholakoff D, Heinrich L, Fisher MR, Dooms G, Reinhold C, Jaffe RB. Uterine leiomyoma: correlation of MR, histopathologic findings and symptoms. Radiology 1986; 158: 385-391.
3. Janus C, White M, Dottino P, Brodman M, Goodman H. Uterine leiomyosarcoma-magnetic resonance imaging. Gynecol Oncol 1989; 32: 79-81.
4. Karasick S, Lev-Toaff AS, Toaff ME. Imaging of uterine leiomyomas. AJR 1992; 158: 799-805.
5. Katsumori T, Nakajima K, Kanada Y. MR Imaging of a uterine myoma after embolization. AJR 1999; 172: 248-249.
6. Kawakami S, Togashi K, Konishi I, Kimura I, Fukuoka M, Mori T, Konish J. Red degeneration of uterine leiomyoma: MR appearance. J Comput Assist Tomogr 1994; 18(6): 925-928.
7. Lee JKT, Gersell DJ, Balfe DM, Worthington JL, Picus D, Gapp GV. The uterus: in vitro MR-anatomic correlation of normal and abnormal specimens. Radiology 1985; 157: 175-179.
8. Mayer DP, Shipilov V. Ultrasonography and MRI of uterine fibroids. Obst Gynecol Clin North Am 1995; 22 (4); 667-725.
9. Mittl RL, Yeh I-Tien, Kressel HY. High signal intensity rim surounding uterine leiomyomas on MR images: pathologic correlation. Radiology 1991; 180: 81-84.
10. Schwartz LB, Zawin M, Carcangiu ML, Lange R, McCarthy S. Does pelvic magnetic resonance imaging differenciate among the histologic subtypes of uterine leiomyomata? Fertil Steril 1998; 70 (3): 580-587.
11. Togashi K, Ozasa H, konishi I, ltoh H, et al. Enlaged uterus: differenciation between adenomyosis and leiomyomas with MR imaging. Radiology 1989; 171: 531-534.
12. Weinreb JC, Barkoff ND, Megibow A, Demopoulos R. The value of MR imaging in the distinguishing leiomyomas. AJR 1990; 154: 295-299.
13. Yamashita Y, Torashima M, Takahashi M, et al. Hyperintense uterine leiomyoma at T2-weighed MR imaging: differenciation with dynamic enhanced MR imaging and clinical implications. Radiology 1993; 189: 721-725.
14. Zawin M, McCarthy S, Scoutt LM, Comite F. High-field MRI and US evaluation of the pelvis in women with leiomyomas. Magn Reson Imaging 1990; 8: 371-376.