Ultrasonography, computed tomography and magnetic resonance imaging in the assessment of pelvic pathology

European Journal of Radiology

Volumn 58, Issue 1, 2006, Pages 147-155

  Balan, P ^a,b  

^a UNIVERSITY OF HULL   (United Kingdom)

^b UNIVERSITY HOSPITAL OF WALES   (United Kingdom)

Author keywords

CT; Female pelvis; MRI; Ultrasonography

Indexed keywords

FEMALE PELVIS; PELVIC IMAGING; PERITONEAL METASTASES;

BIOLOGICAL ORGANS; COMPUTERIZED TOMOGRAPHY; MAGNETIC RESONANCE IMAGING; ULTRASONICS;

PATHOLOGY;

ADNEXA DISEASE; ADULT; AGED; ARTICLE; CANCER INFILTRATION; CLINICAL ASSESSMENT; COMPUTER ASSISTED TOMOGRAPHY; CONTROLLED STUDY; DIAGNOSTIC ACCURACY; ECHOGRAPHY; FEMALE; HISTOPATHOLOGY; HUMAN; INTERMETHOD COMPARISON; MAJOR CLINICAL STUDY; NUCLEAR MAGNETIC RESONANCE IMAGING; OMENTUM; PELVIC DISEASE; PERITONEUM METASTASIS; PRIORITY JOURNAL; UTERUS DISEASE;

ADULT; AGED; AGED, 80 AND OVER; AREA UNDER CURVE; DIAGNOSTIC ERRORS; FEMALE; HUMANS; MAGNETIC RESONANCE IMAGING; MIDDLE AGED; OVARIAN NEOPLASMS; PELVIC NEOPLASMS; PELVIS; PREDICTIVE VALUE OF TESTS; RETROSPECTIVE STUDIES; ROC CURVE; SENSITIVITY AND SPECIFICITY; TOMOGRAPHY, SPIRAL COMPUTED; UTERINE NEOPLASMS;

EID: 33645025428     PISSN: 0720048X     EISSN: None     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1016/j.ejrad.2005.10.002     Document Type: Article

References (24)

1. K.A. Jain Prospective evaluation of adnexal masses with endovaginal gray-scale and duplex and colour Doppler US: correlation with pathological findings Radiology 191 1 1994 63 67
2. J.N. Buy, M.A. Ghossain, and D. Hugol Characterization of adnexal masses: combination of color Doppler and conventional sonography compared with spectral Doppler analysis alone and conventional sonography alone Am J Roentgenol 166 2 1996 385 393
3. S.M. Stein, S. Laifernarin, and M.B. Johnson Differentiation of benign and malignant adnexal masses: relative value of gray-scale, colour Doppler, and spectral Doppler sonography Am J Roentgenol 164 2 1995 381 386
4. J.A. Hanley, and B.J. McNeil A method of comparing the areas under receiver operating characteristic curves derived from the same cases Radiology 148 3 1983 839 843
5. Lowry R. VassarStats: Web Site for Statistical Computation, 2003. http://faculty.vassar.edu/lowry/VassarStats.html.
6. E.K. Outwater, and C.J. Dunton Imaging of the ovary and adnexa: clinical issues and applications of MR-imaging Radiology 194 1 1995 1 18
7. C.J. Aultman, J.F. Feller, K.A. Jain, R.S. Dougherty, and T. Alagoz MR-imaging of sonographically indeterminate adnexal masses: cost-benefit study Radiology 197 1995 354
8. S.K. Stevens, H. Hricak, and J.L. Stern Ovarian lesions detection and characterization with gadolinium-enhanced MR imaging at 1.5 T Radiology 181 2 1991 481 488
9. M. Medl, K.J. Kulenkampff, M. Stiskal, C. Petersengl, S. Leodolter, and H. Czembirek Magnetic-resonance-imaging in the preoperative evaluation of suspected ovarian masses Anticancer Res 15 3 1995 1123 1125
10. Y. Yamashita, M. Torashima, and Y. Hatanaka Adnexal masses: accuracy of characterization with transvaginal US and precontrast and postcontrast MR-imaging Radiology 194 2 1995 557 565
11. M. Reuter, J.C. Steffens, and U. Schuppler Critical evaluation of the specificity of MRI and TVUS for differentiation of malignant from benign adnexal lesions Eur Radiol 8 1 1998 39 44
12. T. Komatsu, I. Konishi, M. Mandai, K. Togashi, S. Kawakami, and J. Konishi Adnexal masses: transvaginal US and gadolinium-enhanced MR imaging assessment of intratumoral structural Radiology 198 1 1996 109 115
13. S. Huber, M. Medl, L. Baumann, and H. Czembirek Value of ultrasound and magnetic resonance imaging in the preoperative evaluation of suspected ovarian masses Anticancer Res 22 4 2002 2501 2507
14. K.A. Jain, D.L. Friedman, T.W. Pettinger, R. Alagappan, R.B. Jeffrey, and F.G. Sommer Adnexal masses: comparison of specificity of endovaginal ultrasound and pelvic MR imaging Radiology 186 3 1993 697 704
15. J.N. Buy, M.A. Ghossain, and C. Sciot Epithelial tumors of the ovary: CT findings and correlation with US Radiology 178 3 1991 811 818
16. D. Grab, F. Flock, I. Stohr, K. Nussle, A. Rieber, and S. Fenchel Classification of asymptomatic adnexal masses by ultrasound, magnetic resonance imaging, and positron emission tomography Gynecol Oncol 77 3 2000 454 459
17. K. Hata, T. Hata, A. Manabe, K. Sugimura, and M. Kitao A Critical-evaluation of transavginal Doppler studies, transvaginal sonography, magnetic resonance imaging, and CA-125 in detecting ovarian-cancer Obstetr Gynecol 80 6 1992 922 926
18. A.B. Kurtz, J.V. Tsimikas, C.M.C. Tempany, U.M. Hamper, P.H. Arger, and R.L. Bree Diagnosis and staging of ovarian cancer: comparative values of Doppler and conventional US, CT, and MR imaging correlated with surgery and histopathologic analysis - Report of the Radiology Diagnostic Oncology Group Radiology 212 1 1999 19 27
19. C.M.C. Tempany, K.H. Zou, S.G. Silverman, D.L. Brown, A.B. Kurtz, and B.J. McNeil Staging of advanced ovarian cancer: comparison of imaging modalities - Report from the Radiological Diagnostic Oncology Group Radiology 215 3 2000 761 767
20. S.H. Kim, B.I. Choi, and J.K. Han Preoperative staging of uterine cervical-carcinoma - comparison of CT and MRI in 99 patients J Comput Assist Tomogr 17 4 1993 633 640
21. R. Smith-Bindman, K. Kerlikowske, V.A. Feldstein, L. Subak, J. Scheidler, and M. Segal Endovaginal ultrasound to exclude endometrial cancer and other endometrial abnormalities J Am Med Assoc 280 17 1998 1510 1517
22. B. Gull, B. Karlsson, I. Milsom, and S. Granberg Can ultrasound replace dilation and curettage? A longitudinal evaluation of postmenopausal bleeding and transvaginal sonographic measurement of the endometrium as predictors of endometrial cancer Am J Obstetr Gynecol 188 2 2003 401 408
23. G. Vorgias, M. Katsoulis, K. Argyrou, J. Tsiaousi, V. Paleogianni, and B. Dertimas Preoperative imaging of primary intra-abdominal gynaecological malignancies, diagnostic accuracy of CT-scan and MRI. A Greek cohort study Eur J Gynaecol Oncol 23 2 2002 139 144
24. J.G. Lijmer, B.W. Mol, S. Heisterkamp, G.J. Bonsel, M.H. Prins, and J.H.P. van der Meulen Empirical evidence of design-related bias in studies of diagnostic tests J Am Med Assoc 282 11 1999 1061 1066