Solving the problem pelvic ultrasound with magnetic resonance imaging

Ultrasound Quarterly

Volumn 22, Issue 3, 2006, Pages 159-168

  Levine, Deborah ^a,b  

^a HARVARD MEDICAL SCHOOL   (United States)

^b BETH ISRAEL DEACONESS MEDICAL CENTER   (United States)

Author keywords

Magnetic resonance imaging; Pelvis; Ultrasound

Indexed keywords

ADNEXA DISEASE; BLEEDING; DEVASCULARIZATION; ECHOGRAPHY; ENDOMETRIUM; HUMAN; INTERMETHOD COMPARISON; NUCLEAR MAGNETIC RESONANCE IMAGING; OUTCOME ASSESSMENT; PELVIS; PREDICTION; PREGNANCY; PRIORITY JOURNAL; REVIEW; UTERINE ARTERY EMBOLIZATION; UTERUS; UTERUS MALFORMATION;

EMBOLIZATION, THERAPEUTIC; FEMALE; GENITAL DISEASES, FEMALE; GENITAL NEOPLASMS, FEMALE; HUMANS; MAGNETIC RESONANCE IMAGING; PELVIS; PREGNANCY; PREGNANCY COMPLICATIONS; ULTRASONOGRAPHY, INTERVENTIONAL;

EID: 33748607758     PISSN: 08948771     EISSN: None     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1097/01.ruq.0000232613.41429.ec     Document Type: Review

References (32)

1. The American Fertility Society classifications of adnexal adhesions, distal tubal occlusion, tubal occlusion secondary to tubal ligation, tubal pregnancies, mullerian anomalies and intrauterine adhesions. Fertil Steril. 1988; 49:944-955.
2. Kirk EP, Chuong CJ, Coulam CB, et al. Pregnancy after metroplasty for uterine anomalies. Fertil Steril. 1993;59:1164-1168.
3. Fedele L, Dorta M, Brioschi D, et al. Pregnancies in septate uteri: outcome in relation to site of uterine implantation as determined by sonography. AJR Am J Roentgenol. 1989;152:781-784.
4. Fedele L, Dorta M, Brioschi D, et al. Magnetic resonance evaluation of double uteri. Obstet Gynecol. 1989;74:844-847.
5. Carrington BM, Hricak H, Nuruddin RN, et al. Mullerian duct anomalies: MR imaging evaluation. Radiology. 1990;176:715-720.
6. Letterie GS, Haggerty M, Lindee G. A comparison of pelvic ultrasound and magnetic resonance imaging as diagnostic studies for mullerian tract abnormalities. Int J Fertil Menopausal Stud. 1995;40:34-38.
7. Fielding JR. MR imaging of Mullerian anomalies: impact on therapy. AJR Am J Roentgenol. 1996;167:1491-1495.
8. Homer HA, Li TC, Cooke ID. The septate uterus: a review of management and reproductive outcome. Fertil Steril. 2000;73:1-14.
9. Reuter KL, Daly DC, Cohen SM. Septate versus bicornuate uteri: errors in imaging diagnosis. Radiology. 1989;172:749-752.
10. Siegler AM. Therapeutic hysteroscopy. Acta Eur Fertil. 1986;17:467-471.
11. Pellerito JS, McCarthy SM, Doyle MB, et al. Diagnosis of uterine anomalies: relative accuracy of MR imaging, endovaginal sonography, and hysterosalpingography. Radiology. 1992;183:795-800.
12. Siewert B, Hochman MG, Levine D. MRI findings of congenital anomalies of the uterus: Causes for inaccurate classification. J Women's Imaging. 2002:100-107.
13. Ascher SM, Arnold LL, Patt RH, et al. Adenomyosis: prospective comparison of MR imaging and transvaginal sonography. Radiology. 1994;190:803-806.
14. Tamai K, Togashi K, Ito K, et al. MR imaging findings of adenomyosis: correlation with histopathologic features and diagnostic pitfalls. Radiographics. 2005;25:21-40.
15. 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.
16. Hutchins FLJ, Worthington-Kirsch R, Berkowitz RP. Selective uterine artery embolization as primary treatment for symptomatic leiomyomata uteri. J Am Assoc Gynecol Laparosc. 1999;6:279-284.
17. Spies JB, Ascher SA, Roth AR, et al. Uterine artery embolization for leiomyomata. Obstet Gynecol. 2001;29-34.
18. Omary RA, Vasireddy S, Chrisman HB, et al. The effect of pelvic MR imaging on the diagnosis and treatment of women with presumed symptomatic uterine fibroids. J Vasc Interv Radiol. 2002;13:1149-1153.
19. deSouza NM, Williams AD. Uterine arterial embolization for leiomyomas: perfusion and volume changes at MR imaging and relation to clinical outcome. Radiology. 2002;222:367-374.
20. Pelage JP, Guaou NG, Jha RC, et al. Uterine fibroid tumors: long-term MR imaging outcome after embolization. Radiology. 2004;230:803-809.
21. Katsumori T, Nakajima K, Tokuhiro M. Gadolinium-enhanced MR imaging in the evaluation of uterine fibroids treated with uterine artery embolization. AJR Am J Roentgenol. 2001;177:303-307.
22. Kitamura Y, Ascher SM, Cooper C, et al. Imaging manifestations of complications associated with uterine artery embolization. Radiographics. 2005;25 Suppl 1:S119-S132.
23. Schwartz LB, Panageas E, Lange R, et al. Female pelvis: impact of MR imaging on treatment decisions and net cost analysis. Radiology. 1994;192:55-60.
24. Siegelman ES, Outwater E, Wang T, et al. Solid pelvic masses caused by endometriosis: MR imaging features. AJR Am J Roentgenol. 1994;163:357-361.
25. Yamashita Y, Hatanaka Y, Torashima M, et al. Mature cystic teratomas of the ovary without fat in the cystic cavity: MR features in 12 cases. AJR Am J Roentgenol. 1994;163:613-616.
26. Kier R, McCarthy SM, Scoutt LM, et al. Pelvic masses in pregnancy: MR imaging. Radiology. 1990;176:709-713.
27. Hess LW, Peaceman A, O'Brien WF, et al. Adnexal mass occurring with intrauterine pregnancy: report of fifty-four patients requiring laparotomy for definitive management. Am J Obstet Gynecol. 1988;158:1029-1034.
28. Levine D, Pedrosa I. MR imaging of the maternal abdomen and pelvis in pregnancy. In: Levine D, ed. Atlas of Fetal MRI. Boca Raton: Taylor & Francis Group; 2005.
29. Dialani V, Levine D. Ectopic pregnancy: a review. Ultrasound Q. 2004;20:105-117.
30. Pedrosa I, Levine D, Eyvazzadeh AD, et al. MR imaging evaluation of acute appendicitis in pregnancy. Radiology. 2006;238:891-899.
31. Eyvazzadeh AD, Pedrosa I, Rofsky NM, et al. MRI of right-sided abdominal pain in pregnancy. AJR Am J Roentgenol. 2004;183:907-914.
32. Zuckerman J, Levine D, McNicholas MM, et al. Imaging of pelvic postpartum complications. AJR Am J Roentgenol. 1997;168:663-668.