Imaging of myomas: Is MRI useful before operating?;Imagerie des myomes: I'IRM est-elle utile en préopératoire?

Gynecologie Obstetrique et Fertilite

Volumn 30, Issue 9, 2002, Pages 711-716

  Bazot, M ^b   Salem, C ^a,b   Frey, I ^a,b   Darai E ^a,b  

^a HÔPITAL TENON   (France)

^b NONE

Author keywords

Diagnosis; Leiomyoma; MRI; Uterine neoplasms

Indexed keywords

ADENOMYOSIS; ADNEXA DISEASE; ARTICLE; COST; DIAGNOSTIC ACCURACY; DIAGNOSTIC IMAGING; DIFFERENTIAL DIAGNOSIS; FEMALE; HUMAN; LEIOMYOMA; NUCLEAR MAGNETIC RESONANCE IMAGING; TUMOR LOCALIZATION; UTERUS MYOMA;

EID: 0036754788     PISSN: 12979589     EISSN: 17696682     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1016/S1297-9589(02)00428-9     Document Type: Article

References (20)

1. Hricak H, Tscholakoff D, Heinrichs L, et al. Uterine leiomyomas: Correlation of MR, histopathologic findings, and symptoms. Radiology 1986; 158: 385-91.
2. Dudiak CM, Turner DA, Patel SK, et al. Uterine leiomyomas in the infertile patient: Preoperative localization with MR imaging versus US and hysterosalpingography. Radiology 1988; 167: 627-630.
3. Ravina J, Herbreteau D, Cigaru-vignerin N, et al. Arterial embolisation to treat uterine myomata. Lancet 1995; 346: 671-2.
4. Burn PR, McCall JM, Chinn RJ, et al. Uterine fibroleiomyoma: MR imaging appearances before and after embolization of uterine arteries. Radiology 2000; 214: 729-34.
5. Takahashi K, Okada M, Imaoka I, et al. Value of magnetic resonance imaging in predicting efficacy of GnRH analogue treatment for uterine leiomyoma. Hum Reprod 2001; 16: 1989-94.
6. Togashi K, Ozasa H, Konishi I, et al. Enlarged uterus: Differentiation between adenomyosis and leiomyoma with MR imaging. Radiology 1989; 171: 531-4.
7. Ascher SM, Arnold LL, Patt RH, et al. Adenomyosis: Prospective comparison of MR imaging and transvaginal sonography. Radiology 1994; 190: 803-6.
8. Reinhold C, McCarthy S, Bret PM, et al. Diffuse adenomyosis: Comparison of endovaginal US and MR imaging with histopathologic correlation. Radiology 1996; 199: 151-8.
9. Bazot M, Cortez A, Darai E, et al. Ultrasonography compared to magnetic resonance imaging for the diagnosis of adenomyosis: Correlation with histopathology. Hum Reprod 2001; 16: 2427-33.
10. Reinhold C, Tafazoli F, Mehio A, et al. Uterine adenomyosis: Endovaginal US and MR imaging features with histopathologic correlation. Radiographics 1999; 19(Suppl): 147-60.
11. Dueholm M, Lundorf E, Hansen ES, et al. Magnetic resonance imaging and transvaginal ultrasonography for the diagnosis of adenomyosis. Fertil Steril 2001; 76: 588-94.
12. Fedele L, Bianchi S, Dorta M, et al. Transvaginal ultrasonography in the differential diagnosis of adenomyoma versus leiomyoma. Am J Obstet Gynecol 1992; 167: 603-6.
13. Schwartz LB, Zawin M, Carcangiu ML, et al. Does pelvic magnetic resonance imaging differentiate among the histologic subtypes of uterine leiomyomata? Fertil Steril 1998; 70: 580-7.
14. Ueda H, Togashi K, Konishi I, et al. Unusual appearances of uterine leiomyomas: MR imaging findings and their histopathologic backgrounds. Radiographics 1999; 19(Suppl): 131-45.
15. Weinreb JC, Barkoff ND, Megibow A, et al. The value of MR imaging in distinguishing leiomyomas from other solid pelvic masses when sonography is indeterminate. AJR Am J Roentgenol 1990; 154: 295-9.
16. Troiano RN, Lazzarini KM, Scoutt LM, et al. Fibroma and fibrothecoma of the ovary: MR imaging findings. Radiology 1997; 204: 795-8.
17. Bazot M, Ghossain MA, Buy JN, et al. Fibrothecomas of the ovary: CT and US findings. J Comput Assist Tomogr 1993; 17: 754-9.
18. Kawakami S, Togashi K, Konishi I, et al. Red degeneration of uterine leiomyoma: MR appearance. J Comput Assist Tomogr 1994; 18: 925-8.
19. Kier R, McCarthy SM, Scoutt LM, et al. Pelvic masses in pregnancy: MR imaging. Radiology 1990; 176: 709-13.
20. Lissoni A, Cormio G, Bonazzi C, et al. Fertility-sparing surgery in uterine leiomyosarcoma. Gynecol Oncol 1998; 70: 348-50.