Skip to main content
SpringerLink
Log in

Standard high-resolution pelvic MRI vs. low-resolution pelvic MRI in the evaluation of deep infiltrating endometriosis

  • Urogenital
  • Published:
European Radiology Aims and scope Submit manuscript

Abstract

Objective

To compare the capabilities of standard pelvic MRI with low-resolution pelvic MRI using fast breath-hold sequences to evaluate deep infiltrating endometriosis (DIE).

Methods

Sixty-eight consecutive women with suspected DIE were studied with pelvic MRI. A double-acquisition protocol was carried out in each case. High-resolution (HR)-MRI consisted of axial, sagittal, and coronal TSE T2W images, axial TSE T1W, and axial THRIVE. Low-resolution (LR)-MRI was acquired using fast single shot (SSH) T2 and T1 images. Two radiologists with 10 and 2 years of experience reviewed HR and LR images in two separate sessions. The presence of endometriotic lesions of the uterosacral ligament (USL), rectovaginal septum (RVS), pouch of Douglas (POD), and rectal wall was noted. The accuracies of LR-MRI and HR-MRI were compared with the laparoscopic and histopathological findings.

Results

Average acquisition times were 24 minutes for HR-MRI and 7 minutes for LR-MRI. The more experienced radiologist achieved higher accuracy with both HR-MRI and LR-MRI. The values of sensitivity, specificity, PPV, NPV, and accuracy did not significantly change between HR and LR images or interobserver agreement for all of the considered anatomic sites.

Conclusions

LR-MRI performs as well as HR-MRI and is a valuable tool for the detection of deep endometriosis extension.

Key Points

• High- and low-resolution MRI perform similarly in deep endometriosis evaluation

• Low-resolution MRI significantly reduces the duration of the examination

• Radiologist experience is fundamental for evaluating deep pelvic endometriosis

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

Similar content being viewed by others

References

  1. Koninckx PR, Meuleman C, Demeyere S, Lesaffre E, Cornillie FJ (1991) Suggestive evidence that pelvic endometriosis is a progressive disease, whereas deeply infiltrating endometriosis is associated with pelvic pain. Fertil Steril 55:759–765

    CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  2. Scioscia M, Bruni F, Ceccaroni M, Steinkasserer M, Stepniewska A, Minelli L (2011) Distribution of endometriotic lesions in endometriosis stage IV supports the menstrual reflux theory and requires specific preoperative assessment and therapy. Acta Obstet Gynecol Scand 90:136–139

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  3. Bazot M, Stivalet A, Darai E, Coudray C, Thomassin-Naggara I, Poncelet E (2013) Comparison of 3D and 2D FSE T2-weighted MRI in the diagnosis of deep pelvic endometriosis: preliminary results. Clin Radiol 68:47–54

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  4. Bazot M, Darai E, Hourani R et al (2004) Deep pelvic endometriosis: MR imaging for diagnosis and prediction of extension of disease. Radiology 232:379–389

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  5. Busard MP, Mijatovic V, Luchinger AB et al (2012) MR imaging of bladder endometriosis and its relationship with the anterior uterine wall: experience in a tertiary referral centre. Eur J Radiol 81:2106–2111

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  6. Scardapane A, Lorusso F, Bettocchi S et al (2013) Deep pelvic endometriosis: accuracy of pelvic MRI completed by MR colonography. Radiol Med 118:323–338

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  7. Kataoka ML, Togashi K, Yamaoka T et al (2005) Posterior cul-de-sac obliteration associated with endometriosis: MR imaging evaluation. Radiology 234:815–823

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  8. Macario S, Chassang M, Novellas S et al (2012) The value of pelvic MRI in the diagnosis of posterior cul-de-sac obliteration in cases of deep pelvic endometriosis. AJR Am J Roentgenol 199:1410–1415

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  9. Chassang M, Novellas S, Bloch-Marcotte C et al (2010) Utility of vaginal and rectal contrast medium in MRI for the detection of deep pelvic endometriosis. Eur Radiol 20:1003–1010

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  10. Faccioli N, Foti G, Manfredi R et al (2010) Evaluation of colonic involvement in endometriosis: double-contrast barium enema vs. magnetic resonance imaging. Abdom Imaging 35:414–421

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  11. Scardapane A, Bettocchi S, Lorusso F et al (2011) Diagnosis of colorectal endometriosis: contribution of contrast enhanced MR-colonography. Eur Radiol 21:1553–1563

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  12. Hawass NE (1997) Comparing the sensitivities and specificities of two diagnostic procedures performed on the same group of patients. Br J Radiol 70:360–366

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  13. Chamie LP, Blasbalg R, Pereira RM, Warmbrand G, Serafini PC (2011) Findings of pelvic endometriosis at transvaginal US, MR imaging, and laparoscopy. Radiographics 31:E77–100

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  14. Anaf V, Simon P, Fayt I, Noel J (2000) Smooth muscles are frequent components of endometriotic lesions. Hum Reprod 15:767–771

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  15. Biscaldi E, Ferrero S, Remorgida V, Rollandi GA (2007) Bowel endometriosis: CT-enteroclysis. Abdom Imaging 32:441–450

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  16. Vimercati A, Achilarre MT, Scardapane A et al (2012) Accuracy of transvaginal sonography and contrast-enhanced magnetic resonance-colonography for the presurgical staging of deep infiltrating endometriosis. Ultrasound Obstet Gynecol 40:592–603

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  17. Carbognin G, Guarise A, Minelli L et al (2004) Pelvic endometriosis: US and MRI features. Abdom Imaging 29:609–618

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  18. Zanardi R, Del Frate C, Zuiani C, Del Frate G, Bazzocchi M (2003) Staging of pelvic endometriosis using magnetic resonance imaging compared with the laparoscopic classification of the American Fertility Society: a prospective study. Radiol Med 105:326–338

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  19. Kinkel K, Frei KA, Balleyguier C, Chapron C (2006) Diagnosis of endometriosis with imaging: a review. Eur Radiol 16:285–298

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  20. Bazot M, Darai E (2005) Sonography and MR imaging for the assessment of deep pelvic endometriosis. J Minim Invasive Gynecol 12:178–185, 177, 186

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  21. Bazot M, Gasner A, Ballester M, Darai E (2011) Value of thin-section oblique axial T2-weighted magnetic resonance images to assess uterosacral ligament endometriosis. Hum Reprod 26:346–353

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

Download references

Acknowledgments

The scientific guarantor of this publication is Amato Antonio Stabile Ianora. The authors of this manuscript declare no relationships with any companies whose products or services may be related to the subject matter of the article. The authors state that this work has not received any funding. One of the authors has significant statistical expertise. Institutional Review Board approved the study. Written informed consent was obtained from all subjects (patients) in this study. Methodology: prospective diagnostic or prognostic study, performed at one institution.

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. Interdisciplinary Department of Medicine, University Hospital “Policlinico” of Bari, Piazza Giulio Cesare, 11, 70124, Bari, Italy

    Arnaldo Scardapane, Filomenamila Lorusso, Annunziata Ferrante, Amato Antonio Stabile Ianora & Giuseppe Angelelli

  2. Department of Obstetrics and Gynecology, Sacro Cuore Don Calabria General Hospital, Negrar, Verona, Italy

    Marco Scioscia

Authors
  1. Arnaldo Scardapane
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  2. Filomenamila Lorusso
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  3. Marco Scioscia
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  4. Annunziata Ferrante
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  5. Amato Antonio Stabile Ianora
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  6. Giuseppe Angelelli
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Arnaldo Scardapane.

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Check for updates. Verify currency and authenticity via CrossMark

Cite this article

Scardapane, A., Lorusso, F., Scioscia, M. et al. Standard high-resolution pelvic MRI vs. low-resolution pelvic MRI in the evaluation of deep infiltrating endometriosis. Eur Radiol 24, 2590–2596 (2014). https://doi.org/10.1007/s00330-014-3297-4

Download citation

  • Received:

  • Revised:

  • Accepted:

  • Published:

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s00330-014-3297-4

Keywords

Search

Navigation