Magnetic resonance imaging in the diagnosis of endometriosis
https://doi.org/10.18705/2311-4495-2019-6-6-40-50
Abstract
Endometriosis is one of the most common gynecological diseases, which has a negative effect on the women’s life quality and is one of the main causes of infertility. The early and preсise desease detection is essential to prevent the possibility of sequelae. From instrumental methods for the diagnosis of endometriosis ultrasound, magnetic resonance imaging and laparoscopy are currently used. MRI is the most informative non-invasive method in instrumental diagnosis of various forms of endometriosis. MRI of the pelvic organs has a high accuracy in the diagnosis of endometriosis and allows visualization of most endometriotic foci, including extraperitoneal, that allows you to properly plan treatment and prevent complications of the disease.
About the Authors
D. S. CheginaRussian Federation
Chegina Daria S., PhD student in the Department of Radiology and Medical Visualization, Almazov National Medical Research Centre
Akkuratova str. 2, Saint Petersburg, Russia, 197341.
O. V. Sergienya
Russian Federation
Sergienya Olga V., MD, Radiologist of MRI Office
Saint Petersburg
A. Yu. Efimtsev
Russian Federation
Efimtsev Alexander Yu., PhD, Head of MRI Office
Saint Petersburg
G. E. Trufanov
Russian Federation
Trufanov Gennady E., Dr. Sc., Professor, Head of the Department of Radiology and Medical Visualization
Saint Petersburg
I. E. Zazerskaya
Russian Federation
Zazerskaya Irina E., Dr. Sc., Head of Gynecological Office
Saint Petersburg
T. M. Zubareva
Russian Federation
Zubareva Tatiana M., MD, Head of Reproductive Gynecological Office
Saint Petersburg
I. G. Tsnobiladze
Russian Federation
Tsnobiladze Iya G., MD, Reproductive Gynecological Office
Saint Petersburg
References
1. Kennedy S, Bergqvist A, Chapron C et al. ESHRE guideline for the diagnosis and treatment of endometriosis. Hum Reprod. 2005;20(10):2698–2704.
2. Adamyan LV, Kulakov VI, Andreeva EH. Endometriosis: a guide for physicians. 2nd ed. M.: Medicine, 2006. p. 410. In Russian
3. Adamyan LV, Spitsyn VA, Andreeva EN. Genetic aspects of gynecological diseases. M.: GEOTAR-Media. 2008. p. 192. In Russian.
4. Adamyan LV, Aznaurova YaB. Review of modern data concerning molecular aspects of endometriosis is presented. Problemy reprodukcii=Problems of reproduction. 2015;21(2):67–77. In Russian.
5. Sourial S, Tempest N, Hapangama DK. Theories on the pathogenesis of endometriosis. Int J Reprod Med. 2014;2014:179515.
6. Adamson GD, Kennedy S, Hummelshoj L. Creating solutions in endometriosis: global collaboration through the World Endometriosis Research Foundation. J Endometr. 2010;2(1):3–6.
7. Campana A, de Agostini A, Bischof P et al. Evaluation of infertility. Hum Reprod Update. 1995;1(6):586–606.
8. Abrao MS, Gonçalves MO, Dias JA Jr et al. Comparison between clinical examination, transvaginal sonography and magnetic resonance imaging for the diagnosis of deep endometriosis. Hum Reprod. 2007;22(12):3092–3097.
9. Bazot M, Lafont C, Rouzier R et al. Diagnostic accuracy of physical examination, transvaginal sonography, rectal endoscopic sonography, and magnetic resonance imaging to diagnose deep infiltrating endometriosis. Fertil Steril. 2009;92(6):1825–1833.
10. Clement PB. The pathology of endometriosis: a survey of the many faces of a common disease emphasizing diagnostic pitfalls and unusual and newly appreciated aspects. Adv Anat Pathol. 2007;14(4):241–260.
11. Chapron C, Marcellin L, Borghese B et al. Rethinking mechanisms, diagnosis and management of endometriosis. Nat Rev Endocrinol. 2019 Sep 5.
12. Demidov VN, Zykin BI. Ultrasound diagnostics in gynecology. M.: Medicine, 1990. p. 220. In Russian.
13. Piketty M, Chopin N, Dousset B et al. Preoperative work-up for patients with deeply infiltrating endometriosis: transvaginal ultrasonography must definitely be the firstline imaging examination. Hum Reprod. 2009;24(3):602– 607.
14. Guerriero S, Ajossa S, Minguez JA et al. Accuracy of transvaginal ultrasound for diagnosis of deep endometriosis in uterosacral ligaments, rectovaginal septum, vagina and bladder: systematic review and meta-analysis. Ultrasound Obstet Gynecol. 2015;46(5):534–545.
15. Coutinho A Jr, Bittencourt LK, Pires CE et al. MR imaging in deep pelvic endometriosis: a pictorial essay. Radiographics. 2011;31(2):549–567.
16. Anichkov NM, Pechenikova VA. Combination of uterine adenomyosis with leiomyoma. Arhiv patologii=Archives of pathology. 2005;67(3):31–34. In Russian.
17. Choudhary S, Fasih N, Papadatos D et al. Unusual imaging appearances of endometriosis. AJR Am J Roentgenol. 2009;192(6):1632–1644.
18. Del Frate C, Girometti R, Pittino M et al. Deep retroperitoneal pelvic endometriosis: MR imaging appearance with laparoscopic correlation. Radiographics. 2006;26(6):1705–1718.
19. Guidelines for radiology in gynecology. For ed. Trufanov GE, Panov VO. SPb.: ALBI-SPb, 2008. p. 589. In Russian.
20. Chamié LP, Pereira RM, Zanatta A et al. Transvaginal US after bowel preparation for deeply infiltrating endometriosis: protocol, imaging appearances, and laparoscopic correlation. Radiographics. 2010;30(5):1235–1249.
21. Aketayeva AS. Modern view on fallopian tubes anatomy and function. Klinicheskaya medicina Kazahstana=Clinical medicine of Kazakhstan 2016;2(40):14–21. In Russian.
22. Adamyan LV., Chuprynin VD, Yarotskaya EL. Modern view on the problem of endometriosis. Quality of life. Medicine. Diseases of the reproductive system. 2004;6(3):21–27. In Russian.
Review
For citations:
Chegina D.S., Sergienya O.V., Efimtsev A.Yu., Trufanov G.E., Zazerskaya I.E., Zubareva T.M., Tsnobiladze I.G. Magnetic resonance imaging in the diagnosis of endometriosis. Translational Medicine. 2019;6(6):40-50. (In Russ.) https://doi.org/10.18705/2311-4495-2019-6-6-40-50