Magnetic resonance imaging for uterine and vaginal anomalies

Current Opinion in Obstetrics and Gynecology

Volumn 21, Issue 5, 2009, Pages 379-389

  Church, Daniel G ^a   Vancil, Jennifer M ^a   Vasanawala, Shreyas S ^a  

^a STANFORD UNIVERSITY SCHOOL OF MEDICINE   (United States)

Author keywords

Anomalies; MRI; Mullerian; Pediatric; Uterine; Vaginal

Indexed keywords

AMENORRHEA; ANUS ATRESIA; ARTIFACT REDUCTION; CLEAR CELL CARCINOMA; CONTRAST ENHANCEMENT; DIAGNOSTIC ACCURACY; HEMATOMETRA; HUMAN; HYDROMETROCOLPOS; IMAGE ANALYSIS; IMAGE QUALITY; NUCLEAR MAGNETIC RESONANCE IMAGING; OMPHALOCELE; PRIORITY JOURNAL; REVIEW; THREE DIMENSIONAL IMAGING; UTERUS DIDELPHYS; UTERUS MALFORMATION; VAGINA CARCINOMA; VAGINA DISEASE; VOLUMETRY;

ADOLESCENT; CHILD; CHILD, PRESCHOOL; FEMALE; HUMANS; MAGNETIC RESONANCE IMAGING; UTERUS; VAGINA;

EID: 70349133121     PISSN: 1040872X     EISSN: None     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1097/GCO.0b013e3283307c3e     Document Type: Review

References (23)

1. Edelstein WA, Glover GH, Hardy CJ, Redington RW. The intrinsic signal-tonoiseratio in NMR imaging. Magn Reson Med 1986; 3:604-618.
2. Gold GE, Han E, Stainsby J, et al. Musculoskeletal MRI at 3.0 T: relaxationtimes and image contrast. AJR Am J Roentgenol 2004; 183:343-351.
3. MacKenzie JD, Vasanawala SS. Advances in pediatric MR imaging. Magn Reson Imaging Clin N Am 2008; 16:385-402.More technical discussion of MR methodology.
4. Chung T, Muthupillai R. Application of SENSE in clinical pediatric body MRimaging. Top Magn Reson Imaging 2004; 15:187-196.
5. Muthupillai R, Vick GW 3rd, Flamm SD, Chung T. Time-resolved contrastenhancedmagnetic resonance angiography in pediatric patients using sensitivityencoding. J Magn Reson Imaging 2003; 17:559-564.
6. Umeoka S, Koyama T, Saga T, et al. Ectopically located gonads in a patientwith mixed gonadal dysgenesis: detection by diffusion-weighted MRI. Abdom Imaging 2005; 30:637-640.
7. Siegelman ES, Outwater EK, Banner MP, et al. High-resolution MR imaging ofthe vagina. Radiographics 1997; 17:1183-1203.
8. Society TAF. Classifications of adnexal adhesions, distal tubal occlusion, tubal occlusion secondary to tubal ligation, tubal pregnancies, mulleriananomalies, and intrauterine adhesion. Fertl Steril 1988; 49:944-955.
9. Speroff L, Fritz M. Recurrent early pregnancy loss. In: Speroff L, Fritz M, editors. Clinical gynecologic endocrinology and infertility, 7th ed. Philadelphia, PA: Lippincott Williams & Wilkins; 2005. pp. 1069-1102.
10. Olpin JD, Heilbrun M. Imaging of Mullerian duct anomalies. Clin Obstet Gynecol 2009; 52:40-56.Recent review with more description of specific anomalies.
11. Deutch TD, Abuhamad AZ. The role of 3-dimensional ultrasonography andmagnetic resonance imaging in the diagnosis of mullerian duct anomalies: areview of the literature. J Ultrasound Med 2008; 27:413-423.
12. Mueller GC, Hussain HK, Smith YR, et al. Mullerian duct anomalies: comparisonof MRI diagnosis and clinical diagnosis. AJR Am J Roentgenol 2007;189:1294-1302.
13. Carrington BM, Hricak H, Nuruddin RN, et al. Mullerian duct anomalies: MRimaging evaluation. Radiology 1990; 176:715-720.
14. Fedele L, Dorta M, Brioschi D, et al. Magnetic resonance imaging in Mayer-Rokitansky-Kuster-Hauser syndrome. Obstet Gynecol 1990; 76:593-596.
15. Fedele L, Dorta M, Brioschi D, et al. Magnetic resonance evaluation of doubleuteri. Obstet Gynecol 1989; 74:844-847.
16. 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.
17. Reinhold C, Hricak H, Forstner R, et al. Primary amenorrhea: evaluation with MR imaging. Radiology 1997; 203:383-390.
18. Troiano RN, McCarthy SM. Mullerian duct anomalies: imaging and clinicalissues. Radiology 2004; 233:19-34.
19. Javitt M. Magnetic resonance imaging in the diagnosis of congenitaluterine anomalies. In: Fleischer A, Javitt M, Jeffory R, Jones HI, editors.Clinical gynecologic imaging. Philadelphia: Lipincott-Raven; 1997. pp. 299-310.
20. Mintz MC, Grumbach K. Imaging of congenital uterine anomalies. Semin Ultrasound CT MR 1988; 9:167-174.
21. Mahboubi S, Rostain A. Computed tomography finding in Mayer-Rokitansky-Kuster-Hauser syndrome associated with endometriosis:a case report. J Comput Tomogr 1987; 11:301-302.
22. Lang IM, Babyn P, Oliver GD. MR imaging of paediatric uterovaginal anomalies.Pediatr Radiol 1999; 29:163-170.
23. Humphries PD, Simpson JC, Creighton SM, Hall-Craggs MA. MRI in theassessment of congenital vaginal anomalies. Clin Radiol 2008; 63:442-448.