Uterine leiomyomas in the infertile patient: Preoperative localization with MR imaging versus US and hysterosalpingography

C. M. Dudiak, D. A. Turner, S. K. Patel, J. T. Archie, B. Silver, M. Norusis

Research output: Contribution to journalArticlepeer-review

109 Scopus citations

Abstract

Eleven women with a history of infertility and uterine leiomyomas underwent magnetic resonance (MR) imaging of the pelvis prior to myomectomy. Nine also underwent preoperative pelvic ultrasonography (US), and ten underwent hysterosalpingography. All studies were interpreted prospectively by independent observers. With each imaging modality, the location (one of 11 anatomic segments), size, and appearance of detected uterine leiomyomas were determined and compared with surgical and histologic findings. Among the nine patients who underwent both MR and US, the sensitivity (85%) and accuracy (94%) of MR imaging for abnormal segments was significantly better than that of US (sensitivity = 69%, P = .015; accuracy = 87%, P = .043). For the ten patients who underwent both MR and hysterosalpingography, the sensitivity (91%) and accuracy (96%) of MR imaging was better than that of hysterosalpingography (sensitivity = 18%, P = .0005; accuracy = 72%, P = .0005). The specificities of the three modalities did not significantly differ (100%, 97%, and 98% for MR, US, and hysterosalpingography, respectively). These data suggest that MR imaging is superior to US or hysterosalpingography for preoperatively locating uterine leiomyomas.

Original languageEnglish (US)
Pages (from-to)627-630
Number of pages4
JournalRadiology
Volume167
Issue number3
DOIs
StatePublished - 1988
Externally publishedYes

ASJC Scopus subject areas

  • Radiology Nuclear Medicine and imaging

Fingerprint

Dive into the research topics of 'Uterine leiomyomas in the infertile patient: Preoperative localization with MR imaging versus US and hysterosalpingography'. Together they form a unique fingerprint.

Cite this