• Rosario Francesco Grasso, Vincenza Di Giacomo, Pietro Sedati, Ornella Sizzi, Giuseppe Florio, Eliodoro Faiella, Alfonso Rossetti, Riccardo Del Vescovo, and Bruno Beomonte Zobel.
• Department of Diagnostic Imaging, University of Rome, Italy.
• Abdom Imaging. 2010 Dec 1; 35 (6): 716-25.

PurposeTo compare two different imaging modalities, magnetic resonance (MR), and three-dimensional sonography (3DUS), in order to evaluate the specific role in preoperative work-up of deep infiltrating endometriosis.Materials And Methods33 women with endometriosis underwent 3DUS and MR followed by surgical and histopathological investigations. Investigators described the disease extension in the following sites: torus uterinus and uterosacral ligaments (USL), vagina, rectovaginal-septum, rectosigmoid, bladder, ovaries. Results were compared with surgical and histopathological findings.ResultsOvarian and deep pelvic endometriosis were found by surgery and histology in, respectively, 24 (72.7%) and 22 (66.6%) of the 33 patients. Sensitivity and specificity values of 3DUS for the diagnosis of endometrial cysts were 87.5% and 100%, respectively; those of MRI were 96.8% and 91.1%, respectively. Sensitivity and specificity of 3DUS for the diagnosis of deep infiltrating endometriosis in specific sites were: USL 50% and 94.7%; vagina 84% and 80%; rectovaginal-septum 76.9% and 100%; rectosigmoid 33.3% and 100%; bladder 25% and 100%. Those of MR were: USL 69.2% and 94.3%; vagina 83.3% and 88.8%; rectovaginal-septum 76.4% and 100%; restosigmoid 75% and 100%; bladder 83.3% and 100%.ConclusionsMR accurately diagnoses deep infiltrating endometriosis; 3DUS accurately diagnoses deep infiltrating endometriosis in specific locations.

21 keywords...

hide…