Fertility and sterility · 2001
Evaluation of the uterine cavity with magnetic resonance imaging, transvaginal sonography, hysterosonographic examination, and diagnostic hysteroscopy.
Сравнительное исследованиеОценочное исследованиеСтатьяПоддержка исследования: вне правительства СШАНазвание 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.
Dueholm M, Lundorf E, Hansen E S, Ledertoug S, Olesen F
Аннотация
OBJECTIVE: To evaluate and compare the diagnostic accuracy of magnetic resonance imaging (MRI), transvaginal ultrasonography (TVS), hysterosonographic examination (HSE), and hysteroscopy in the evaluation of the uterine cavity.
DESIGN: Independent double-blind study.
SETTING: University medical hospital.
PATIENT(S): One hundred six consecutive premenopausal women who underwent hysterectomy for benign diseases.
INTERVENTION(S): Results of MRI, TVS, HSE, and hysteroscopy were compared with the results of histopathologic examination at hysterectomy (the gold standard).
RESULT(S): The overall sensitivity was MRI 0.76, TVS 0.69, HSE 0.83, and hysteroscopy 0.84. The specificity was MRI 0.92, TVS 0.83, HSE 0.90, and hysteroscopy 0.88 (MRI, HSE, hysteroscopy vs. TVS <0.05). Polyps were missed in 9 of 12 cases at MRI, 7 at TVS, 4 at HSE, and 2 at hysteroscopy (MRI vs. hysteroscopy, and TVS vs. hysteroscopy <0.05). The sensitivity for identification of submucous myomas was MRI 1.0, TVS 0.83, HSE 0.90, and hysteroscopy 0.82; the specificity was MRI 0.91, TVS 0.90, HSE 0.89, and hysteroscopy 0.87 (MRI vs. TVS, and MRI vs. hysteroscopy). Magnetic resonance imaging was significantly more precise than TVS, HSE, and hysteroscopy in determining submucous myoma in-growth (2-way ANOVA <0.05).
CONCLUSION(S): For exclusion of abnormalities in the uterine cavity, MRI, HSE, and hysteroscopy were equally effective and slightly superior to TVS. Magnetic resonance imaging and TVS missed endometrial abnormalities such as polyps, but MRI and HSE were most accurate for the evaluation of submucous myomas, and MRI was superior in evaluation of exact submucous myoma in-growth.
DESIGN: Independent double-blind study.
SETTING: University medical hospital.
PATIENT(S): One hundred six consecutive premenopausal women who underwent hysterectomy for benign diseases.
INTERVENTION(S): Results of MRI, TVS, HSE, and hysteroscopy were compared with the results of histopathologic examination at hysterectomy (the gold standard).
RESULT(S): The overall sensitivity was MRI 0.76, TVS 0.69, HSE 0.83, and hysteroscopy 0.84. The specificity was MRI 0.92, TVS 0.83, HSE 0.90, and hysteroscopy 0.88 (MRI, HSE, hysteroscopy vs. TVS <0.05). Polyps were missed in 9 of 12 cases at MRI, 7 at TVS, 4 at HSE, and 2 at hysteroscopy (MRI vs. hysteroscopy, and TVS vs. hysteroscopy <0.05). The sensitivity for identification of submucous myomas was MRI 1.0, TVS 0.83, HSE 0.90, and hysteroscopy 0.82; the specificity was MRI 0.91, TVS 0.90, HSE 0.89, and hysteroscopy 0.87 (MRI vs. TVS, and MRI vs. hysteroscopy). Magnetic resonance imaging was significantly more precise than TVS, HSE, and hysteroscopy in determining submucous myoma in-growth (2-way ANOVA <0.05).
CONCLUSION(S): For exclusion of abnormalities in the uterine cavity, MRI, HSE, and hysteroscopy were equally effective and slightly superior to TVS. Magnetic resonance imaging and TVS missed endometrial abnormalities such as polyps, but MRI and HSE were most accurate for the evaluation of submucous myomas, and MRI was superior in evaluation of exact submucous myoma in-growth.