Fertility and sterility · 2011
Comparison of different diagnostic procedures for the staging of malformations associated with Mayer-Rokitansky-Küster-Hauser syndrome.
Сравнительное исследованиеСтатьяМногоцентровое исследованиеНазвание и аннотация: Перевод в очереди
Обработка статьи · этапы, ошибки и управление
Загрузка состояния…
Ошибки и ограничения
История · было → стало
Состояние обновляется каждые 5 секунд, пока блок открыт. Процент показывается только там, где известен объём работы. Пауза останавливает продолжение этапа; текущий запрос к источнику может завершиться.
Lermann Johannes, Mueller Andreas, Wiesinger Erika, Häberle Lothar, Brucker Sara, Wallwiener Diethelm, Dittrich Ralf, Renner Stefan P, Beckmann Matthias W, Oppelt Patricia G
Аннотация
OBJECTIVE: To compare different diagnostic procedures for staging malformations associated with Mayer-Rokitansky-Küster-Hauser (MRKH) syndrome.
DESIGN: Retrospective two-center cohort study (Canadian Task Force classification II-2).
SETTING: University hospital.
PATIENT(S): One hundred and thirty-eight women with MRKH.
INTERVENTION(S): Clinical examinations, abdominal or perineal/rectal ultrasound, magnetic resonance imaging (MRI), and laparoscopy.
MAIN OUTCOME MEASURE(S): Agreement between the results obtained with the other methods and the results obtained with the reference methods for correct staging of malformations, presented as kappa values (κ).
RESULT(S): The VCUAM (vagina cervix uterus adnex-associated malformation) classification system was used to classify genital malformations in 138 women with MRKH. The reference methods for examining the individual organs were: vagina-clinical examination; cervix/uterus and adnexa-laparoscopy; and urinary tract malformations-MRI. The values obtained were as follows. Vagina was κ 0.74 for MRI versus clinical examination; ultrasound and laparoscopy did not allow adequate description of vaginal malformations. Cervical findings were rarely detailed with any of the imaging methods. Uterus was κ 0.93 for MRI versus laparoscopy, and κ 0.83 for ultrasound. For adnexa, only laparoscopy was able to describe the morphology adequately. The urinary tract was κ 0.87 for ultrasound versus MRI.
CONCLUSION(S): For the correct staging of malformations associated with MRKH, MRI or a combination of clinical examination and ultrasound are equivalent. However, none of the imaging methods adequately describes adnexal morphology.
DESIGN: Retrospective two-center cohort study (Canadian Task Force classification II-2).
SETTING: University hospital.
PATIENT(S): One hundred and thirty-eight women with MRKH.
INTERVENTION(S): Clinical examinations, abdominal or perineal/rectal ultrasound, magnetic resonance imaging (MRI), and laparoscopy.
MAIN OUTCOME MEASURE(S): Agreement between the results obtained with the other methods and the results obtained with the reference methods for correct staging of malformations, presented as kappa values (κ).
RESULT(S): The VCUAM (vagina cervix uterus adnex-associated malformation) classification system was used to classify genital malformations in 138 women with MRKH. The reference methods for examining the individual organs were: vagina-clinical examination; cervix/uterus and adnexa-laparoscopy; and urinary tract malformations-MRI. The values obtained were as follows. Vagina was κ 0.74 for MRI versus clinical examination; ultrasound and laparoscopy did not allow adequate description of vaginal malformations. Cervical findings were rarely detailed with any of the imaging methods. Uterus was κ 0.93 for MRI versus laparoscopy, and κ 0.83 for ultrasound. For adnexa, only laparoscopy was able to describe the morphology adequately. The urinary tract was κ 0.87 for ultrasound versus MRI.
CONCLUSION(S): For the correct staging of malformations associated with MRKH, MRI or a combination of clinical examination and ultrasound are equivalent. However, none of the imaging methods adequately describes adnexal morphology.