Journal of personalized medicine · 2022
Sonographic Assessment of Uterine Biometry for the Diagnosis of Diffuse Adenomyosis in a Tertiary Outpatient Clinic.
СтатьяНазвание и аннотация: Перевод пока не подготовлен
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.
Raimondo Diego, Lazzeri Lucia, Raffone Antonio, Giorgi Matteo, Orsini Benedetta, Verrelli Ludovica, Lenzi Jacopo, Travaglino Antonio, De Meis Lucia, Mollo Antonio, Zupi Errico, Seracchioli Renato, Casadio Paolo
Аннотация
BACKGROUND: to compare several uterine biometric parameters at transvaginal ultrasound (TVUS) between adenomyosis and non-adenomyosis uteri and evaluate their role for the diagnosis of diffuse adenomyosis.
METHODS: prospective observational study conducted between the 1 February 2022 and the 30 April 2022. In this case, 56 patients with TVUS diagnosis of adenomyosis were included. A 1:1 ratio age and parity-matched group of non-adenomyosis patients was selected. We compared sonographic uterine biometric parameters (longitudinal (LD), anteroposterior (APD) and transverse (TD) diameters, volume, simple and complex diameter ratios) and investigated their diagnostic performance.
RESULTS: all sonographic parameters were significantly different between the study groups, except for TD/(LD+APD). Optimal cut-off values of APD and LD/APD showed the best sensitivity and specificity. APD diameter equal or superior to 39.5 mm (95% CI, 36.2-42.8) had sensitivity of 0.70 (95% CI, 0.57-0.80), specificity of 0.71 (95% CI, 0.59-0.82) and accuracy of 0.75 (95% CI, 0.66-0.84). LD/APD equal or inferior to 2.05 (95% CI, 1.96-2.13) showed sensitivity and specificity of 0.70 (95% CI, 0.57-0.80) each and accuracy of 0.72 (95% CI, 0.62-0.81).
CONCLUSIONS: several biometric uterine parameters at TVUS in fertile-aged women were statistically different between adenomyosis and non-adenomyosis uteri, though their optimal cut-off values showed low accuracy in diagnosing adenomyosis.
METHODS: prospective observational study conducted between the 1 February 2022 and the 30 April 2022. In this case, 56 patients with TVUS diagnosis of adenomyosis were included. A 1:1 ratio age and parity-matched group of non-adenomyosis patients was selected. We compared sonographic uterine biometric parameters (longitudinal (LD), anteroposterior (APD) and transverse (TD) diameters, volume, simple and complex diameter ratios) and investigated their diagnostic performance.
RESULTS: all sonographic parameters were significantly different between the study groups, except for TD/(LD+APD). Optimal cut-off values of APD and LD/APD showed the best sensitivity and specificity. APD diameter equal or superior to 39.5 mm (95% CI, 36.2-42.8) had sensitivity of 0.70 (95% CI, 0.57-0.80), specificity of 0.71 (95% CI, 0.59-0.82) and accuracy of 0.75 (95% CI, 0.66-0.84). LD/APD equal or inferior to 2.05 (95% CI, 1.96-2.13) showed sensitivity and specificity of 0.70 (95% CI, 0.57-0.80) each and accuracy of 0.72 (95% CI, 0.62-0.81).
CONCLUSIONS: several biometric uterine parameters at TVUS in fertile-aged women were statistically different between adenomyosis and non-adenomyosis uteri, though their optimal cut-off values showed low accuracy in diagnosing adenomyosis.