{"title":"盆腔深部子宫内膜异位症的磁共振成像诊断:走向标准化方案?","authors":"Isabelle Thomassin-Naggara, Christine Sadjo Zoua, Marc Bazot, Michele Monroc, Horace Roman, Léo Razakamanantsoa, Pascal Rousset","doi":"10.1007/s00330-024-10842-0","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Objectives: </strong>To assess the diagnostic efficacy of an MRI protocol and patient preparation in detecting deep pelvic endometriosis (DPE).</p><p><strong>Material and methods: </strong>The cohort is from the ENDOVALIRM database, a multicentric national retrospective study involving women who underwent MRI followed by pelvic surgery for endometriosis (reference standard). Two senior radiologists independently analyzed MRI findings using the deep pelvic endometriosis index (dPEI) to determine lesion locations. The study evaluated the impact of bowel preparation, vaginal and rectal opacification, MRI unit type (1.5-T or 3-T), additional sequences (thin slice T2W or 3DT2W), and gadolinium injection on reader performance for diagnosing DPE locations. Fisher's exact test assessed differences in diagnostic accuracy based on patient preparation and MRI parameters.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>The final cohort comprised 571 women with a mean age of 33.3 years (± 6.6 SD). MRI with bowel preparation outperformed MRI without bowel preparation in identifying torus/uterosacral ligament (USL) locations (p < 0.0001) and rectosigmoid nodules (p = 0.01). MRI without vaginal opacification diagnosed 94.1% (301/320) of torus/USL locations, surpassing MR with vaginal opacification, which diagnosed 85% (221/260) (p < 0.001). No significant differences related to bowel preparation or vaginal opacification were observed for other DPE locations. Rectal opacification did not affect diagnostic accuracy in the overall population, except in patients without bowel preparation, where performance improved (p = 0.04). There were no differences in diagnostic accuracy regarding MRI unit type (1.5-T/3-T), presence of additional sequences, or gadolinium injection for any endometriotic locations.</p><p><strong>Conclusion: </strong>Bowel preparation prior to MRI examination is preferable to rectal or vaginal opacification for diagnosing deep endometriosis pelvic lesions.</p><p><strong>Clinical relevance statement: </strong>Accurate diagnosis and staging of DPE are essential for effective treatment planning. Bowel preparation should be prioritized over rectal or vaginal opacification in MRI protocols. Optimizing MRI protocols for diagnostic performance with appropriate opacification techniques will help diagnose deep endometriosis more accurately.</p><p><strong>Key points: </strong>Evaluating deep endometriosis in collapsible organs such as the vagina and rectum is difficult. Bowel preparation and an absence of vaginal opacification were found to be diagnostically beneficial. Bowel preparation should be prioritized over rectal or vaginal opacification in MRI protocols.</p>","PeriodicalId":12076,"journal":{"name":"European Radiology","volume":" ","pages":"7705-7715"},"PeriodicalIF":4.7000,"publicationDate":"2024-12-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Diagnostic MRI for deep pelvic endometriosis: towards a standardized protocol?\",\"authors\":\"Isabelle Thomassin-Naggara, Christine Sadjo Zoua, Marc Bazot, Michele Monroc, Horace Roman, Léo Razakamanantsoa, Pascal Rousset\",\"doi\":\"10.1007/s00330-024-10842-0\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"<p><strong>Objectives: </strong>To assess the diagnostic efficacy of an MRI protocol and patient preparation in detecting deep pelvic endometriosis (DPE).</p><p><strong>Material and methods: </strong>The cohort is from the ENDOVALIRM database, a multicentric national retrospective study involving women who underwent MRI followed by pelvic surgery for endometriosis (reference standard). Two senior radiologists independently analyzed MRI findings using the deep pelvic endometriosis index (dPEI) to determine lesion locations. The study evaluated the impact of bowel preparation, vaginal and rectal opacification, MRI unit type (1.5-T or 3-T), additional sequences (thin slice T2W or 3DT2W), and gadolinium injection on reader performance for diagnosing DPE locations. Fisher's exact test assessed differences in diagnostic accuracy based on patient preparation and MRI parameters.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>The final cohort comprised 571 women with a mean age of 33.3 years (± 6.6 SD). MRI with bowel preparation outperformed MRI without bowel preparation in identifying torus/uterosacral ligament (USL) locations (p < 0.0001) and rectosigmoid nodules (p = 0.01). MRI without vaginal opacification diagnosed 94.1% (301/320) of torus/USL locations, surpassing MR with vaginal opacification, which diagnosed 85% (221/260) (p < 0.001). No significant differences related to bowel preparation or vaginal opacification were observed for other DPE locations. Rectal opacification did not affect diagnostic accuracy in the overall population, except in patients without bowel preparation, where performance improved (p = 0.04). There were no differences in diagnostic accuracy regarding MRI unit type (1.5-T/3-T), presence of additional sequences, or gadolinium injection for any endometriotic locations.</p><p><strong>Conclusion: </strong>Bowel preparation prior to MRI examination is preferable to rectal or vaginal opacification for diagnosing deep endometriosis pelvic lesions.</p><p><strong>Clinical relevance statement: </strong>Accurate diagnosis and staging of DPE are essential for effective treatment planning. Bowel preparation should be prioritized over rectal or vaginal opacification in MRI protocols. Optimizing MRI protocols for diagnostic performance with appropriate opacification techniques will help diagnose deep endometriosis more accurately.</p><p><strong>Key points: </strong>Evaluating deep endometriosis in collapsible organs such as the vagina and rectum is difficult. Bowel preparation and an absence of vaginal opacification were found to be diagnostically beneficial. Bowel preparation should be prioritized over rectal or vaginal opacification in MRI protocols.</p>\",\"PeriodicalId\":12076,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"European Radiology\",\"volume\":\" \",\"pages\":\"7705-7715\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":4.7000,\"publicationDate\":\"2024-12-01\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"European Radiology\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"3\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.1007/s00330-024-10842-0\",\"RegionNum\":2,\"RegionCategory\":\"医学\",\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"2024/7/3 0:00:00\",\"PubModel\":\"Epub\",\"JCR\":\"Q1\",\"JCRName\":\"RADIOLOGY, NUCLEAR MEDICINE & MEDICAL IMAGING\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"European Radiology","FirstCategoryId":"3","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1007/s00330-024-10842-0","RegionNum":2,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"2024/7/3 0:00:00","PubModel":"Epub","JCR":"Q1","JCRName":"RADIOLOGY, NUCLEAR MEDICINE & MEDICAL IMAGING","Score":null,"Total":0}
Diagnostic MRI for deep pelvic endometriosis: towards a standardized protocol?
Objectives: To assess the diagnostic efficacy of an MRI protocol and patient preparation in detecting deep pelvic endometriosis (DPE).
Material and methods: The cohort is from the ENDOVALIRM database, a multicentric national retrospective study involving women who underwent MRI followed by pelvic surgery for endometriosis (reference standard). Two senior radiologists independently analyzed MRI findings using the deep pelvic endometriosis index (dPEI) to determine lesion locations. The study evaluated the impact of bowel preparation, vaginal and rectal opacification, MRI unit type (1.5-T or 3-T), additional sequences (thin slice T2W or 3DT2W), and gadolinium injection on reader performance for diagnosing DPE locations. Fisher's exact test assessed differences in diagnostic accuracy based on patient preparation and MRI parameters.
Results: The final cohort comprised 571 women with a mean age of 33.3 years (± 6.6 SD). MRI with bowel preparation outperformed MRI without bowel preparation in identifying torus/uterosacral ligament (USL) locations (p < 0.0001) and rectosigmoid nodules (p = 0.01). MRI without vaginal opacification diagnosed 94.1% (301/320) of torus/USL locations, surpassing MR with vaginal opacification, which diagnosed 85% (221/260) (p < 0.001). No significant differences related to bowel preparation or vaginal opacification were observed for other DPE locations. Rectal opacification did not affect diagnostic accuracy in the overall population, except in patients without bowel preparation, where performance improved (p = 0.04). There were no differences in diagnostic accuracy regarding MRI unit type (1.5-T/3-T), presence of additional sequences, or gadolinium injection for any endometriotic locations.
Conclusion: Bowel preparation prior to MRI examination is preferable to rectal or vaginal opacification for diagnosing deep endometriosis pelvic lesions.
Clinical relevance statement: Accurate diagnosis and staging of DPE are essential for effective treatment planning. Bowel preparation should be prioritized over rectal or vaginal opacification in MRI protocols. Optimizing MRI protocols for diagnostic performance with appropriate opacification techniques will help diagnose deep endometriosis more accurately.
Key points: Evaluating deep endometriosis in collapsible organs such as the vagina and rectum is difficult. Bowel preparation and an absence of vaginal opacification were found to be diagnostically beneficial. Bowel preparation should be prioritized over rectal or vaginal opacification in MRI protocols.
期刊介绍:
European Radiology (ER) continuously updates scientific knowledge in radiology by publication of strong original articles and state-of-the-art reviews written by leading radiologists. A well balanced combination of review articles, original papers, short communications from European radiological congresses and information on society matters makes ER an indispensable source for current information in this field.
This is the Journal of the European Society of Radiology, and the official journal of a number of societies.
From 2004-2008 supplements to European Radiology were published under its companion, European Radiology Supplements, ISSN 1613-3749.