Advertisement

MRI and CT of the Female Pelvis

  • Bernd Hamm
  • Rahel A. Kubik-Huch
  • Claudia Kluner

Keywords

Endometrial Cancer Cervical Carcinoma Endometrial Carcinoma Uterine Artery Embolization Myometrial Invasion 
These keywords were added by machine and not by the authors. This process is experimental and the keywords may be updated as the learning algorithm improves.

Preview

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

References

  1. 1.
    Dueholm M, Lundorf E, Hansen ES et al (2002) Accuracy of magnetic resonance imaging and transvaginal ultrasonography in the diagnosis, mapping and measurement of uterine myomas. Am J Obstet Gynecol 186:409–415CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  2. 2.
    Dueholm M, Lundorf E, Sorensen JS et al (2002) Reproducibility of evaluation of the uterus by transvaginal sonography, hysterosonographic examination, hysteroscopy and magnetic resonance imaging. Hum Reprod 17:197–200Google Scholar
  3. 3.
    Dueholm M, Lundorf E, Hansen ES et al (2001) Evaluation of the uterine cavity with magnetic resonance imaging, transvaginal sonography, hysterosonograhic examination and diagnostic hysteroscopy. Fertil Steril 76:350–357CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  4. 4.
    Hricak H, Kim BK (1993) Contrast-enhanced MR imaging of the female pelvis. JMRI 3:297–306PubMedGoogle Scholar
  5. 5.
    Katsumori T, Nakajima K, Tokuhiro M (2001) Gadolinium-enhanced MR imaging in the evaluation of uterine fibroids treated with uterine artery embolization. AJR 177:303–307PubMedGoogle Scholar
  6. 6.
    Hamlin DJ, Petersson H, Fitzsimmons J Morgan LS (1985) MR imaging of uterine leiomyomas and their complications. JCAT 9:902–907Google Scholar
  7. 7.
    Hricak H, Tscholakoff D, Heinrichs L et al (1986) Uterine leiomyoma correlation by magnetic resonance imaging: clinical symptoms and histopathology. Radiology 158:385–391PubMedGoogle Scholar
  8. 8.
    Mittl RL, Yeh I-T, Kressel HY (1991) High-signal-intensity rim surrounding uterine leiomyomas on MR images: pathologic correlation. Radiology 180:81–83PubMedGoogle Scholar
  9. 9.
    Murase E, Siegelmann ES, Outwater EK et al (1999) Uterine leiomyomas: histopathologic features, MR imaging findings, differential diagnosis and treatment. Radiographics 1179–1197Google Scholar
  10. 10.
    Hricak H, Finck S, Honda G et al (1992) MR imaging in the evaluation of benign uterine masses: value of gadopentetate dimeglumine-enhanced T1-weighted images. AJR 158:1043–1250PubMedGoogle Scholar
  11. 11.
    Reinhold C, Atri M, Mehio A, Zakarian R, Aldis AE, Bret PM (1995) Diffuse uterine adenomyosis: morphologic criteria and diagnostic accuracy of endovaginal sonography. Radiology 197:609–614PubMedGoogle Scholar
  12. 12.
    Siskin GP, Tublin ME, Stainken BF et al (2001) Uterine artery embolization for the treatment of adenomyosis: clinical response and evaluation with MR imaging. AJR 177:297–302PubMedGoogle Scholar
  13. 13.
    Togashi K, Nishimura K, Itho K et al (1988) Adenomyosis: diagnosis with MR imaging. Radiology 166:111–114PubMedGoogle Scholar
  14. 14.
    Togashi K, Ozasa H, Konishi I et al (1989) Enlarged uterus: differentiation between adenomyosis and leiomyoma with MR imaging. Radiology 171:531–534PubMedGoogle Scholar
  15. 15.
    Kang S, Turner DA, Foster GS, Rapoport MI, Spencer SA, Wang J-Z (1996) Adenomyosis: specificity of 5 mm as the maximum normal uterine junctional zone thickness in MR images. AJR 166:1145–1150PubMedGoogle Scholar
  16. 16.
    Martius G, Breckwoldt M, Pfleiderer A (1996) Lehrbuch der Gynäkologie und Geburtshilfe. Georg Thieme Verlag, StuttgartGoogle Scholar
  17. 17.
    Chen SS, Lee L (1983) Retroperitoneal lymph node metastases in stage I carcinoma of the endometrium: correlation with risk factors. Gynecol Oncol 16:319–325CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  18. 18.
    DelMaschio A, Vanzulli A, Sironi S et al (1993) Estimating the depth of myometrial involvement by endometrial carcinoma: efficacy of transvaginal sonography vs MR imaging. AJR 160:533–538PubMedGoogle Scholar
  19. 19.
    Yamashita Y, Mizutani H, Torashima M et al (1993) Assessment of myometrial invasion by endometrial carcinoma: transvaginal sonography vs contrast-enhanced MR imaging. AJR 161:595–599PubMedGoogle Scholar
  20. 20.
    Frei KA and Kinkel K (2001) Staging endometrial cancer: role of magnetic resonance imaging. J Magn Reson Imaging 13:850–855CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  21. 21.
    Grasel RP, Outwater EK, Siegelman ES et al (2000) Endometrial polyps: MR imaging features and distinction from endometrial carcinoma. Radiology 214:47–52PubMedGoogle Scholar
  22. 22.
    Scoutt, LM, McCarthy SM, Flynn SD et al (1995) Clinical stage I endometrial carcinoma: pitfalls in preoperative assessment with MR imaging. Radiology 194:567–572PubMedGoogle Scholar
  23. 23.
    Hricak H, Hamm B, Semelka R et al (1991) Carcinoma of the uterus: use of gadopentetate dimeglumine in MR imaging. Radiology 181:95–106PubMedGoogle Scholar
  24. 24.
    Sironi S, Colombo E, Villa G et al (1992) Myometrial invasion by endometrial carcinoma: assessment with plain and gadolinium-enhanced MR imaging. Radiology 185:207–212PubMedGoogle Scholar
  25. 25.
    Yamashita Y, Harada M, Sawada T, Takahashi M, Miyazaki K, Okamura H (1993) Normal uterus and FIGO stage I endometrial carcinoma: dynamic gadolinium-enhanced MR imaging. Radiology 186:495–501PubMedGoogle Scholar
  26. 26.
    Savci G, Ozyaman T, Tutar M, Bilgin T, Erol O, Tuncel E (1998) Assessment of depth of myometrial invasion by endometrial carcinoma: comparison of T2-weighted SE and contrast-enhanced dynamic GRE MR imaging. Eur Radiol 8:218–223CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  27. 27.
    Sironi S, DeCobelli F, Scarfone G et al (1993) Carcinoma of the cervix: value of plain and gadolinium-enhanced MR imaging in assessing degree of invasiveness. Radiology 188:797–801PubMedGoogle Scholar
  28. 28.
    Hawighorst H, Knapstein PG, Weikel W et al (1996) Cervical carcinoma: comparison of standard and pharmacokinetic MR imaging. Radiology 201:531–539PubMedGoogle Scholar
  29. 29.
    Scheidler J, Heuck A, Wencke K, Kimmig R, Müller-Lisse U, Reiser M (1997) Parametrial invasion of cervical cancer: value of contrast-enhanced fat-suppressed T1-weighted SE-sequences at 1.5 Tesla. Fortschr Röntgenstr 166:312–316Google Scholar
  30. 30.
    Scheidler J, Heuck AF, Steinborn M, Kimmig R, Reiser MF (1998) Parametrial invasion in cervical carcinoma: evaluation of detection at MR imaging with fat suppression. Radiology 206:125–129PubMedGoogle Scholar
  31. 31.
    Loncaster JA, Carrington BM, Sykes JR et al (2002) Prediction of radiotherapy outcome using dynamic contrast MRI of carcinoma of the cervix. Int J Radiat Oncol Biol Phys 54:759–767CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  32. 32.
    Ohara K, Tanaka Y, Tsunoda H, Nishida M, Sugahara S, Itai Y (2002) Assessment of cervical cancer radioresponse by serum squamous cell carcinoma antigen and magnetic resonance imaging. Obstet Gynecol 100:781–787CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  33. 33.
    Sironi S, Belloni C, Taccagni GL, DelMaschio A (1991) Carcinoma of the cervix: value of MR imaging in detecting parametrial involvement. AJR 156:753–756PubMedGoogle Scholar
  34. 34.
    Zaloudek C (1994) The ovary. In: Compel C, Silverberg SG (eds) Pathology in gynecology and obstetrics, Lippincott, Philadelphia, pp 313–413Google Scholar
  35. 35.
    Outwater EK, Duntion CJ (1995) Imaging of the ovary and adnexa. Clinical issues and applications of MR imaging. Radiology 194:1–18PubMedGoogle Scholar
  36. 36.
    Gross B, Moss A, Mihara K, Goldberg H, Glazer G (1983) Computed tomography of gynecologic diseases. Am J Roentgenol 141:765–773Google Scholar
  37. 37.
    Weström L, Bengston LO, Mardh PA (1976) The risk of pelvic inflammatory disease in women using intrauterine contraceptive devices compared to non-users. Lancet 2:221–224CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  38. 38.
    Hirsch HA (1978) Die akute Salpingitis: Pathogenese, Aetiologie, Diagnose und Prognose. Gynäkologe 11:176–184Google Scholar
  39. 39.
    Wulf KH, Schmidt-Matthiesen H (1988) Gutartige gynäkologische Erkrankungen I. In: Klinik der Frauenheilkunde und Geburtshilfe, Mestwerdt W (ed) Urban und Schwarzenberg, MunichGoogle Scholar
  40. 40.
    Berland L, Lawson T, Foley D, Albarelli J (1982) Ultrasound evaluation of pelvic infections. Radiol Clin North Am 20:367–383PubMedGoogle Scholar
  41. 41.
    Wilbur A (1992) Computed tomography of tuboovarian abscesses. J Comp Assist Tomogr 14:625–628Google Scholar
  42. 42.
    Wilbur A, Aizenstein R, Napp T (1992) CT findings in tuboo-varian abscess. Am J Roentgenol 159:575–579Google Scholar
  43. 43.
    Huch Böni RA, Haldeman Heusler R, Hebisch G, Krestin GP (1994) CT und MRT bei Entzündungen der weiblichen Genitalorgane. Radiologe 34:390–396PubMedGoogle Scholar
  44. 44.
    Mitchell D, Mintz M, Spritzer Ch, Gussman D, Arger P, Coleman B, Axel L, Kressel H (1987) Adnexal masses: MR imaging observations at 1.5 T, with US and CT correlation. Radiology 162:319–324PubMedGoogle Scholar
  45. 45.
    Hricak H, Carrington B (1991) MRI of the pelvis. Deutscher Ärzte-Verlag, Cologne, pp 43–249Google Scholar
  46. 46.
    Mawhinney RR, Powell MC, Worthington BS, Symonds EM (1988) Magnetic resonance imaging of benign ovarian masses. Br J Radiol 723: 179–186Google Scholar
  47. 47.
    Einhorn W, Nilsson B, Stovall K (1985) Factors influencing survival in carcinoma of the ovary. Cancer 55:2015–2019Google Scholar
  48. 48.
    Boring CC, Squires TS, Tong T, Montgomery S (1994) Cancer statistics, 1994. CA Cancer J Clin 44:7–26PubMedGoogle Scholar
  49. 49.
    Yamashita Y, Torashima M, Hatanaka Y et al (1995) Adnexal masses: accuracy of characterization with transvaginal US and precontrast and postcontrast MR imaging. Radiology 194:557–565PubMedGoogle Scholar
  50. 50.
    Komatsu T, Konishi I, Mandai M, Togashi K, Kawakami S, Konishi J, Mori T (1996) Adnexal masses: transvaginal US and gadolinium-enhanced MR imaging assessment of intratumoral structure. Radiology 198: 109–115PubMedGoogle Scholar
  51. 51.
    Smith FW, Cherryman GR, Bayliss AP et al (1988) Comparative study of the accuracy of ultrasound imaging, X-ray computerized tomography and low field MRI diagnosis of ovarian malignancy. Magn Reson Imaging 6:225–227CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  52. 52.
    Ghossain MA, Buy JN, Ligneres C et al (1991) Epithelial tumors of the ovary: comparison of MR and CT findings. Radiology 181:863–870PubMedGoogle Scholar
  53. 53.
    Stevens SK, Hricak H, Campos Z (1993) Teratomas versus cystic hemorrhagic adnexal lesions: differentiation with proton-selective fat-saturation MR imaging. Radiology 186:481–488PubMedGoogle Scholar
  54. 54.
    Huber S, Medl M, Baumann L, Czembirek H (2002) Value of ultrasound and magnetic resonance imaging in the preoperative evaluation of suspected ovarian masses. Anticancer Res 22:2501–2507PubMedGoogle Scholar
  55. 55.
    Kubik-Huch RA, Dorffler W, von Schulthess GK et al (2000) Value of (18F)-FDG positron emission tomography, computed tomography, and magnetic resonance imaging in diagnosing primary and recurrent ovarian carcinoma. Eur Radiol 10:761–767CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  56. 56.
    Ascher SM, Outwater EK, Reinhold C (1997). Adnexa. In: Semelka RC, Ascher SM, Reinhold C (eds) MRI of the abdomen and pelvis. Wiley-Liss, New York, pp 661–716Google Scholar
  57. 57.
    Low RN, Carter WD, Saleh F, Sigeti JS (1995) Ovarian cancer: comparison of findings with perfluorocarbon-enhanced MR imaging, In-111-CYT-103 immunoscintigraphy, and CT. Radiology 195:391–400PubMedGoogle Scholar
  58. 58.
    Low RN, Sigeti JS (1994) MR imaging of peritoneal disease: comparison of contrast-enhanced fast multiplanar spoiled gradient-recalled and spin-echo imaging. Am J Roentgenol 163:1131–1140Google Scholar
  59. 59.
    Low RN, Barone RM, Lacey C, Sigeti JS, Alzate GD, Sebrechts CP (1997) Peritoneal tumor: MR imaging with dilute oral barium and intravenous gadolinium-containing contrast agents compared with unenhanced MR imaging and CT. Radiology 204:513–520PubMedGoogle Scholar
  60. 60.
    Stevens SK, Hricak H, Stern JL (1991) Ovarian lesions: detection and characterization with gadolinium-enhanced MR imaging at 1.5 T. Radiology 181:481–488PubMedGoogle Scholar
  61. 61.
    Semelka RC, Lawrence PH, Shoenut JP, Heywood M, Kroeker MA, Lotocki R (1993) Primary ovarian cancer: prospective comparison of contrast-enhanced CT and pre-and postcontrast, fat-suppressed MR imaging with histologic correlation. J Magn Reson Imaging 3:99–106PubMedGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer-Verlag Berlin Heidelberg 2005

Authors and Affiliations

  • Bernd Hamm
  • Rahel A. Kubik-Huch
  • Claudia Kluner

There are no affiliations available

Personalised recommendations