Skip to main content
SpringerLink
Log in

Assessing the clinical utility of color Doppler ultrasound for ovarian torsion in the setting of a negative contrast-enhanced CT scan of the abdomen and pelvis

  • Published:
Abdominal Imaging Aims and scope Submit manuscript

Abstract

Purpose

The purpose of this study is to evaluate the utility of color Doppler ultrasound (CDU) in the assessment of ovarian torsion following a negative contrast-enhanced computed tomography (CT) examination.

Methods

This is a retrospective study of women who presented to the ED with abdominal pain and received both a contrast-enhanced CT and CDU within a 24-h period. The abdominal/pelvic CT examinations were evaluated for findings specific to torsion, including ovarian size greater than 5 cm, the presence of free fluid, uterine deviation, fallopian tube thickening, ovarian fat stranding, smooth wall thickening, the presence of the “twisted pedicle” sign, and abnormal ovarian enhancement. The results were compared to the presence or absence of ovarian torsion on the concurrent US.

Results

The initial query yielded 834 cases among 789 women. Of those 834 cases, 283 cases in 261 women received both imaging modalities within a 24-h period. The CT examinations demonstrated 48 cases with an ovarian size greater than 5 cm. 84 cases showed the presence of free fluid. Three cases of fallopian tube thickening were identified. One case of smooth wall thickening and a “twisted pedicle” sign were noted. Fifteen cases demonstrated stranding of the peri-ovarian fat. Twenty nine cases showed abnormal ovarian enhancement. A total of 111 cases showed at least one positive finding. Fourteen positive cases were identified on the CDU studies. Of the 14 positive cases, 11 had ovarian size greater than 5 cm. Twelve cases demonstrated the presence of free fluid. There was no uterine deviation or smooth wall thickening. One twisted pedicle was noted. Seven cases showed peri-ovarian fat stranding. Ten cases showed abnormal enhancement. Abnormalities on CT were noted in all cases suspicious for ovarian torsion on CDU. No negative CT examinations were associated with a positive CDU. In this small sample size, the negative predictive value of a negative CT examination was 100%.

Conclusion

A negative contrast-enhanced CT examination of the abdomen and pelvis is sufficient to rule out ovarian torsion. Therefore, there is no utility in the addition of CDU specifically to evaluate for ovarian torsion following a negative contrast-enhanced CT scan of the abdomen and pelvis.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this article

Log in via an institution

Price excludes VAT (USA)
Tax calculation will be finalised during checkout.

Instant access to the full article PDF.

Institutional subscriptions

Fig. 1
Fig. 2
Fig. 3
Fig. 4
Fig. 5

Similar content being viewed by others

References

  1. Huchon C, Fauconnier A (2010) Adnexal torsion: a literature review. Eur J Obstet Gynecol Reprod Biol 150(1):8–12. doi:10.1016/j.ejogrb.2010.02.006

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  2. Nichols DH, Julian PJ (1985) Torsion of the adnexa. Clin Obstet Gynecol 28(2):375–380

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  3. Chang HC, Bhatt S, Dogra VS (2008) Pearls and pitfalls in diagnosis of ovarian torsion. Radiographics 28(5):1355–1368. doi:10.1148/rg.285075130

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  4. Roche O, Chavan N, Aquilina J, Rockall A (2012) Radiological appearances of gynaecological emergencies. Insights Imaging 3(3):265–275. doi:10.1007/s13244-012-0157-0

    Article  PubMed Central  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  5. Rostamzadeh A, Mirfendereski S, Rezaie MJ, Rezaei S (2014) Diagnostic efficacy of sonography for diagnosis of ovarian torsion. Pak J Med Sci 30(2):413–416

    PubMed Central  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  6. Duigenan S, Oliva E, Lee SI (2012) Ovarian torsion: diagnostic features on CT and MRI with pathologic correlation. Am J Roentgenol 198(2):W122–131. doi:10.2214/AJR.10.7293

    Article  Google Scholar 

  7. Lourenco AP, Swenson D, Tubbs RJ, Lazarus E (2014) Ovarian and tubal torsion: imaging findings on US, CT, and MRI. Emerg Radiol 21(2):179–187. doi:10.1007/s10140-013-1163-3

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  8. Houry D, Abbott JT (2001) Ovarian torsion: a fifteen-year review. Ann Emerg Med 38(2):156–159. doi:10.1067/mem.2001.114303

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  9. Chiou SY, Lev-Toaff AS, Masuda E, Feld RI, Bergin D (2007) Adnexal torsion: new clinical and imaging observations by sonography, computed tomography, and magnetic resonance imaging. J Ultrasound Med 26(10):1289–1301

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  10. Hiller N, Appelbaum L, Simanovsky N, et al. (2007) CT features of adnexal torsion. Am J Roentgenol 189(1):124–129. doi:10.2214/AJR.06.0073

    Article  Google Scholar 

  11. Rha SE, Byun JY, Jung SE, et al. (2002) CT and MR imaging features of adnexal torsion. Radiographics 22(2):283–294. doi:10.1148/radiographics.22.2.g02mr02283

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  12. Oltmann SC, Fischer A, Barber R, et al. (2009) Cannot exclude torsion—a 15-year review. J Pediatr Surg 44(6):1212–1216 (discussion 1217). doi:10.1016/j.jpedsurg.2009.02.028

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  13. Swenson DW, Lourenco AP, Beaudoin FL, et al. (2014) Ovarian torsion: Case-control study comparing the sensitivity and specificity of ultrasonography and computed tomography for diagnosis in the emergency department. Eur J Radiol 83(4):733–738. doi:10.1016/j.ejrad.2014.01.001

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  14. Warner MA, Fleischer AC, Edell SL, et al. (1985) Uterine adnexal torsion: sonographic findings. Radiology 154(3):773–775. doi:10.1148/radiology.154.3.3881798

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  15. Albayram F, Hamper UM (2001) Ovarian and adnexal torsion: spectrum of sonographic findings with pathologic correlation. J Ultrasound Med 20(10):1083–1089

    CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  16. Lee EJ, Kwon HC, Joo HJ, Suh JH, Fleischer AC (1998) Diagnosis of ovarian torsion with color Doppler sonography: depiction of twisted vascular pedicle. J Ultrasound Med 17(2):83–89

    CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  17. Ben-Ami M, Perlitz Y, Haddad S (2002) The effectiveness of spectral and color Doppler in predicting ovarian torsion. A prospective study. Eur J Obstet Gynecol Reprod Biol 104(1):64–66

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  18. Pena JE, Ufberg D, Cooney N, Denis AL (2000) Usefulness of Doppler sonography in the diagnosis of ovarian torsion. Fertil Steril 73(5):1047–1050

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  19. Mashiach R, Melamed N, Gilad N, Ben-Shitrit G, Meizner I (2011) Sonographic diagnosis of ovarian torsion: accuracy and predictive factors. J Ultrasound Med 30(9):1205–1210

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  20. Wilkinson C, Sanderson A (2012) Adnexal torsion—a multimodality imaging review. Clin Radiol 67(5):476–483. doi:10.1016/j.crad.2011.10.018

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  21. Lee JH, Park SB, Shin SH, et al. (2009) Value of intra-adnexal and extra-adnexal computed tomographic imaging features diagnosing torsion of adnexal tumor. J Comput Assist Tomogr 33(6):872–876. doi:10.1097/RCT.0b013e31819e41f3

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  22. Kimura I, Togashi K, Kawakami S, et al. (1994) Ovarian torsion: CT and MR imaging appearances. Radiology 190(2):337–341. doi:10.1148/radiology.190.2.8284378

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  23. Naiditch JA, Barsness KA (2013) The positive and negative predictive value of transabdominal color Doppler ultrasound for diagnosing ovarian torsion in pediatric patients. J Pediatr Surg 48(6):1283–1287. doi:10.1016/j.jpedsurg.2013.03.024

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  24. Patel MD, Dubinsky TJ (2007) Reimaging the female pelvis with ultrasound after CT: general principles. Ultrasound Q 23(3):177–187. doi:10.1097/RUQ.0b013e318151fc31

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  25. Moore C, Meyers AB, Capotasto J, Bokhari J (2009) Prevalence of abnormal CT findings in patients with proven ovarian torsion and a proposed triage schema. Emerg Radiol 16(2):115–120. doi:10.1007/s10140-008-0754-x

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

Download references

Disclosure

No conflicts to disclose.

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. Department of Radiological Sciences, University of California, Irvine, 101 The City Drive South, Orange, CA, 92697, USA

    Alexander Lam, Megha Nayyar, Mohammad Helmy, Roozbeh Houshyar, Wanda Marfori & Chandana Lall

Authors
  1. Alexander Lam
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  2. Megha Nayyar
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  3. Mohammad Helmy
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  4. Roozbeh Houshyar
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  5. Wanda Marfori
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  6. Chandana Lall
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Alexander Lam.

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Check for updates. Verify currency and authenticity via CrossMark

Cite this article

Lam, A., Nayyar, M., Helmy, M. et al. Assessing the clinical utility of color Doppler ultrasound for ovarian torsion in the setting of a negative contrast-enhanced CT scan of the abdomen and pelvis. Abdom Imaging 40, 3206–3213 (2015). https://doi.org/10.1007/s00261-015-0535-4

Download citation

  • Published:

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s00261-015-0535-4

Keywords

Search

Navigation