Adenomyosis: Sonohysterography with MRI correlation

American Journal of Roentgenology

Volumn 192, Issue 4, 2009, Pages 1112-1116

  Verma, Sachit K ^a   Lev Toaff, Anna S ^a,b   Baltarowich, Oksana H ^a   Bergin, Diane ^a,c   Verma, Manisha ^a   Mitchell, Donald G ^a  

^a THOMAS JEFFERSON UNIVERSITY HOSPITAL   (United States)

^b HOSPITAL OF THE UNIVERSITY OF PENNSYLVANIA   (United States)

^c UNIVERSITY HOSPITAL GALWAY   (Ireland)

Author keywords

Adenomyosis; MRI; Myometrium; Sonohysterography

Indexed keywords

ADENOMYOSIS; ADULT; ARTICLE; CLINICAL ARTICLE; CLINICAL FEATURE; CORRELATION ANALYSIS; FEMALE; GYNECOLOGICAL RADIOGRAPHY; HUMAN; MYOMETRIUM; NUCLEAR MAGNETIC RESONANCE IMAGING; PRIORITY JOURNAL; SONOHYSTEROGRAPHY;

ADULT; CONTRAST MEDIA; ENDOMETRIOSIS; FEMALE; GADOLINIUM DTPA; HUMANS; MAGNETIC RESONANCE IMAGING; MIDDLE AGED; RETROSPECTIVE STUDIES; ULTRASONOGRAPHY;

EID: 63849226113     PISSN: 0361803X     EISSN: None     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.2214/AJR.08.1405     Document Type: Article

References (13)

1. Azziz R. Adenomyosis: current perspectives. Obstet Gynecol Clin North Am 1989; 16:221-235
2. Vercellini P, Ragni G, Trespidi L, et al. Adenomyosis: a déjà vu? Obstet Gynecol Surv 1993; 48:789-794
3. Bazot M, Cortez A, Emile D, et al. Ultrasonography compared with magnetic resonance imaging for the diagnosis of adenomyosis: correlation with histopathology. Hum Reprod 2001; 16:2427-2433
4. Bazot M, Dara E, Rouger J, Detchev R, Cortez A,Uzan S. Limitations of transvaginal sonography for the diagnosis of adenomyosis, with histopatho-logical correlation. Ultrasound Obstet Gynecol 2002; 20:605-611
5. Dueholm M, Lundorf E, Hansen ES, Ledertoug S, Olesen F. Evaluation of the uterine cavity with magnetic resonance imaging, transvaginal sonography,hysterosonographic examination, and diagnostic hysteroscopy. Fertil Steril 2001; 76:350-357
6. Dueholm M, Lundorf E, S Orensen JS, Ledertoug S, Olesen F, Laursen H. Reproducibility of evaluation of the uterus by transvaginal sonography, hysterosonographic examination, hysteroscopy and magnetic resonance imaging. Hum Reprod 2002; 17:195-200
7. Lev-Toaff AS, Toaff ME, Liu JB, Merton DA, Goldberg BB. Value of sonohysterography in the diagnosis and management of abnormal uterine bleeding. Radiology 1996; 201:179-184
8. Chopra S, Lev-Toaff AS, Ors F, Bergin D. Adeno-myosis: common and uncommon manifestations on sonography and magnetic resonance imaging. J Ultrasound Med 2006; 25:617-627
9. Ascher SM, Arnold LL, Patt RH, et al. Adeno- myosis: prospective comparison of MR imaging and transvaginal sonography. Radiology 1994; 190:803-806
10. Reinhold C, McCarthy S, Bret PM, et al. Diffuse adenomyosis: comparison of endovaginal US and MR imaging with histopathologic correlation. Radiology 1996; 199:151-158
11. Reinhold C, Tafazoli F, Mehio A, et al. Uterine adenomyosis: endovaginal US and MR imaging features with histopathologic correlation. RadioGraphics 1999; 19[spec no]:S147-S160
12. Simpson WL Jr, Beitia LG, Mester J. Hysterosal- pingography: a reemerging study. RadioGraphics 2006; 26:419-431
13. Ors F, Lev-Toaff AS, Bergin D. Echogenic foci mimicking adenomyosis presumably due to air in-travasation into the myometrium during sonohys-terography. Diagn Interv Radiol 2007; 13:26-29