Download PDF
Semin Reprod Med 2017; 35(01): 005-024
DOI: 10.1055/s-0036-1597127
Review Article
Thieme Medical Publishers 333 Seventh Avenue, New York, NY 10001, USA.

Ultrasound Imaging for Ovarian and Deep Infiltrating Endometriosis

Caterina Exacoustos
1   Department of Biomedicine and Prevention, Obstetrics and Gynecology Unit, University of Rome “Tor Vergata”, Rome, Italy
,
Errico Zupi
1   Department of Biomedicine and Prevention, Obstetrics and Gynecology Unit, University of Rome “Tor Vergata”, Rome, Italy
,
Emilio Piccione
1   Department of Biomedicine and Prevention, Obstetrics and Gynecology Unit, University of Rome “Tor Vergata”, Rome, Italy
› Author Affiliations
Further Information

Publication History

Publication Date:
11 January 2017 (online)

    Permissions and Reprints

Abstract

The main challenges of imaging for endometriosis are the detection of nonovarian disease and the evaluation of the extension of the disease into pelvic structures. Transvaginal ultrasonography (TVS) has been proposed as the first-line imaging technique because it allows extensive exploration of the pelvis. The “typical” endometrioma is a unilocular cyst with homogeneous low-level echogenicity (ground glass echogenicity) of the cyst fluid. The use of color Doppler helps avoid classifying malignancies as endometriomas, defining the presence of vascular flow in papillations. The real-time dynamic TVS examination of adhesions and pouch of Douglas (POD) obliteration, using the sliding sign technique, seems to be useful in the identification of women at increased risk for bowel endometriosis. Transvaginal ultrasound allows an accurate assessment of the vagina, particularly the areas of the posterior and lateral vaginal fornixes, the retrocervical area with torus uterinum and uterosacral ligaments, and the rectovaginal septum. The slightly filled bladder permits an evaluation of the bladder walls and the presence of endometriotic nodules which appear as hypoechoic linear or spherical lesions bulging toward the lumen, involving the serosa, muscularis, or (sub)mucosa of the bladder. Deep nodules of the rectum appear as hypoechoic lesions, linear or nodular retroperitoneal thickening with irregular borders, penetrating into the intestinal wall distorting its normal structure with the presence of few vessels observed with power Doppler evaluation. Adenomyosis can be observed with the two-dimensional (2D) TVS showing the typical myometrial features and 3D evaluation of the junctional zone. Although the sensitivity and specificity of TVS in the prediction of deeply infiltrating endometriosis and adenomyosis is high, their assessment by TVS is difficult and needs a great expertise.

Keywords

deep infiltrating endometriosis - transvaginal ultrasound - endometrioma, adenomyosis - 3D ultrasound - bladder endometriosis - rectal endometriosis
 

  • References

  • 1 Koninckx PR, Ussia A, Adamyan L, Wattiez A, Donnez J. Deep endometriosis: definition, diagnosis, and treatment. Fertil Steril 2012; 98 (3) 564-571
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 2 Society AF. Revised American Fertility Society classification of endometriosis: 1985. Fertil Steril 1985; 43 (3) 351-352
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 3 Tuttlies F, Keckstein J, Ulrich U , et al. [ENZIAN-score, a classification of deep infiltrating endometriosis]. Zentralbl Gynakol 2005; 127 (5) 275-281
    Article in Thieme ConnectPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 4 Haas D, Shebl O, Shamiyeh A, Oppelt P. The rASRM score and the Enzian classification for endometriosis: their strengths and weaknesses. Acta Obstet Gynecol Scand 2013; 92 (1) 3-7
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 5 Haas D, Oppelt P, Shebl O, Shamiyeh A, Schimetta W, Mayer R. Enzian classification: does it correlate with clinical symptoms and the rASRM score?. Acta Obstet Gynecol Scand 2013; 92 (5) 562-566
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 6 Adamson GD. Endometriosis classification: an update. Curr Opin Obstet Gynecol 2011; 23 (4) 213-220
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 7 Chapron C, Fauconnier A, Vieira M , et al. Anatomical distribution of deeply infiltrating endometriosis: surgical implications and proposition for a classification. Hum Reprod 2003; 18 (1) 157-161
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 8 Koninckx PR, Martin DC. Deep endometriosis: a consequence of infiltration or retraction or possibly adenomyosis externa?. Fertil Steril 1992; 58 (5) 924-928
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 9 Di Donato N, Montanari G, Benfenati A , et al. Prevalence of adenomyosis in women undergoing surgery for endometriosis. Eur J Obstet Gynecol Reprod Biol 2014; 181: 289-293
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 10 Naftalin J, Hoo W, Pateman K, Mavrelos D, Holland T, Jurkovic D. How common is adenomyosis? A prospective study of prevalence using transvaginal ultrasound in a gynaecology clinic. Hum Reprod 2012; 27 (12) 3432-3439
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 11 Lazzeri L, Di Giovanni A, Exacoustos C , et al. Preoperative and postoperative clinical and transvaginal ultrasound findings of adenomyosis in patients with deep infiltrating endometriosis. Reprod Sci 2014; 21 (8) 1027-1033
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 12 Kralik R, Trnovsky P, Kopáčová M. Transabdominal ultrasonography of the small bowel. Gastroenterol Res Pract 2013; 2013: 896704
    PubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 13 Chapron C, Pietin-Vialle C, Borghese B, Davy C, Foulot H, Chopin N. Associated ovarian endometrioma is a marker for greater severity of deeply infiltrating endometriosis. Fertil Steril 2009; 92 (2) 453-457
    Google Scholar
  • 14 Redwine DB. Ovarian endometriosis: a marker for more extensive pelvic and intestinal disease. Fertil Steril 1999; 72 (2) 310-315
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 15 Nezhat CR, Nezhat FR, Nezhat CH, Admon D. Treatment of ovarian endometriosis. In: Nezhat CR, Berger GS, Nezhat FR, Buttram VC, Nezhat CH, eds. Endometriosis Advanced Management and Surgical Technique. New York: Springer-Verlag Inc.; 1995: 95-106
    Google Scholar
  • 16 RCOG guideline. The investigation and management of endometriosis. Green top Guide 2006 , 24 Available at: http://www.rcog.org.uk/files/rcog-corp/GTG2410022011.pdf
    PubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 17 Johnson NP, Hummelshoj L. World Endometriosis Society Montpellier Consortium. Consensus on current management of endometriosis. Hum Reprod 2013; 28 (6) 1552-1568
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 18 Guerriero S, Condous G, van den Bosch T , et al. Systematic approach to sonographic evaluation of the pelvis in women with suspected endometriosis, including terms, definitions and measurements: a consensus opinion from the International Deep Endometriosis Analysis (IDEA) group. Ultrasound Obstet Gynecol 2016; 48 (3) 318-332
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 19 Mais V, Guerriero S, Ajossa S, Angiolucci M, Paoletti AM, Melis GB. The efficiency of transvaginal ultrasonography in the diagnosis of endometrioma. Fertil Steril 1993; 60 (5) 776-780
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 20 Guerriero S, Mais V, Ajossa S, Paoletti AM, Angiolucci M, Melis GB. Transvaginal ultrasonography combined with CA-125 plasma levels in the diagnosis of endometrioma. Fertil Steril 1996; 65 (2) 293-298
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 21 Patel MD, Feldstein VA, Chen DC, Lipson SD, Filly RA. Endometriomas: diagnostic performance of US. Radiology 1999; 210 (3) 739-745
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 22 Valentin L. Use of morphology to characterize and manage common adnexal masses. Best Pract Res Clin Obstet Gynaecol 2004; 18 (1) 71-89
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 23 Guerriero S, Ajossa S, Mais V, Risalvato A, Lai MP, Melis GB. The diagnosis of endometriomas using colour Doppler energy imaging. Hum Reprod 1998; 13 (6) 1691-1695
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 24 Van Holsbeke C, Van Calster B, Bourne T , et al. External validation of diagnostic models to estimate the risk of malignancy in adnexal masses. Clin Cancer Res 2012; 18 (3) 815-825
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 25 Guerriero S, Van Calster B, Somigliana E , et al. Age-related differences in the sonographic characteristics of endometriomas. Hum Reprod 2016; 31 (8) 1723-1731
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 26 Testa AC, Timmerman D, Van Holsbeke C , et al. Ovarian cancer arising in endometrioid cysts: ultrasound findings. Ultrasound Obstet Gynecol 2011; 38 (1) 99-106
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 27 Fruscella E, Testa AC, Ferrandina G , et al. Sonographic features of decidualized ovarian endometriosis suspicious for malignancy. Ultrasound Obstet Gynecol 2004; 24 (5) 578-580
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 28 Mascilini F, Moruzzi C, Giansiracusa C , et al. Imaging in gynecological disease. 10: Clinical and ultrasound characteristics of decidualized endometriomas surgically removed during pregnancy. Ultrasound Obstet Gynecol 2014; 44 (3) 354-360
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 29 Timor-Tritsch IE, Lerner JP, Monteagudo A, Murphy KE, Heller DS. Transvaginal sonographic markers of tubal inflammatory disease. Ultrasound Obstet Gynecol 1998; 12 (1) 56-66
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 30 Johnson N, van Voorst S, Sowter MC, Strandell A, Mol BW. Surgical treatment for tubal disease in women due to undergo in vitro fertilisation. Cochrane Database Syst Rev 2010; (1) CD002125
    PubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 31 Guerriero S, Ajossa S, Garau N, Alcazar JL, Mais V, Melis GB. Diagnosis of pelvic adhesions in patients with endometrioma: the role of transvaginal ultrasonography. Fertil Steril 2010; 94 (2) 742-746
    Google Scholar
  • 32 Okaro E, Condous G, Khalid A , et al. The use of ultrasound-based ‘soft markers’ for the prediction of pelvic pathology in women with chronic pelvic pain--can we reduce the need for laparoscopy?. BJOG 2006; 113 (3) 251-256
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 33 Holland TK, Yazbek J, Cutner A, Saridogan E, Hoo WL, Jurkovic D. Value of transvaginal ultrasound in assessing severity of pelvic endometriosis. Ultrasound Obstet Gynecol 2010; 36 (2) 241-248
    PubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 34 Exacoustos C, Zupi E, Carusotti C , et al. Staging of pelvic endometriosis: role of sonographic appearance in determining extension of disease and modulating surgical approach. J Am Assoc Gynecol Laparosc 2003; 10 (3) 378-382
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 35 Guerriero S, Ajossa S, Lai MP, Mais V, Paoletti AM, Melis GB. Transvaginal ultrasonography in the diagnosis of pelvic adhesions. Hum Reprod 1997; 12 (12) 2649-2653
    Google Scholar
  • 36 Hudelist G, Oberwinkler KH, Singer CF , et al. Combination of transvaginal sonography and clinical examination for preoperative diagnosis of pelvic endometriosis. Hum Reprod 2009; 24 (5) 1018-1024
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 37 Khong SY, Bignardi T, Luscombe G, Lam A. Is pouch of Douglas obliteration a marker of bowel endometriosis?. J Minim Invasive Gynecol 2011; 18 (3) 333-337
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 38 Hudelist G, Fritzer N, Staettner S , et al. Uterine sliding sign: a simple sonographic predictor for presence of deep infiltrating endometriosis of the rectum. Ultrasound Obstet Gynecol 2013; 41 (6) 692-695
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 39 Reid S, Lu C, Casikar I , et al. Prediction of pouch of Douglas obliteration in women with suspected endometriosis using a new real-time dynamic transvaginal ultrasound technique: the sliding sign. Ultrasound Obstet Gynecol 2013; 41 (6) 685-691
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 40 Menakaya U, Condous G. The retroverted uterus: refining the description of the real time dynamic ‘sliding sign’. Australas J Ultrasound Med 2013; 16: 97
    PubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 41 Reid S, Lu C, Casikar I , et al. The prediction of pouch of Douglas obliteration using offline analysis of the transvaginal ultrasound ‘sliding sign’ technique: inter- and intra-observer reproducibility. Hum Reprod 2013; 28 (5) 1237-1246
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 42 Menakaya U, Infante F, Lu C , et al. Interpreting the real-time dynamic ‘sliding sign’ and predicting pouch of Douglas obliteration: an interobserver, intraobserver, diagnostic-accuracy and learning-curve study. Ultrasound Obstet Gynecol 2016; 48 (1) 113-120
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 43 Guerriero S, Ajossa S, Gerada M, D'Aquila M, Piras B, Melis GB. “Tenderness-guided” transvaginal ultrasonography: a new method for the detection of deep endometriosis in patients with chronic pelvic pain. Fertil Steril 2007; 88 (5) 1293-1297
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 44 Valenzano Menada M, Remorgida V, Abbamonte LH, Nicoletti A, Ragni N, Ferrero S. Does transvaginal ultrasonography combined with water-contrast in the rectum aid in the diagnosis of rectovaginal endometriosis infiltrating the bowel?. Hum Reprod 2008; 23 (5) 1069-1075
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 45 Chamié LP, Pereira RM, Zanatta A, Serafini PC. Transvaginal US after bowel preparation for deeply infiltrating endometriosis: protocol, imaging appearances, and laparoscopic correlation. Radiographics 2010; 30 (5) 1235-1249
    Google Scholar
  • 46 Goncalves MO, Podgaec S, Dias Jr JA, Gonzalez M, Abrao MS. Transvaginal ultrasonography with bowel preparation is able to predict the number of lesions and rectosigmoid layers affected in cases of deep endometriosis, defining surgical strategy. Hum Reprod 2010; 25 (3) 665-671
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 47 León M, Vaccaro H, Alcázar JL , et al. Extended transvaginal sonography in deep infiltrating endometriosis: use of bowel preparation and an acoustic window with intravaginal gel: preliminary results. J Ultrasound Med 2014; 33 (2) 315-321
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 48 Hudelist G, English J, Thomas AE, Tinelli A, Singer CF, Keckstein J. Diagnostic accuracy of transvaginal ultrasound for non-invasive diagnosis of bowel endometriosis: systematic review and meta-analysis. Ultrasound Obstet Gynecol 2011; 37 (3) 257-263
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 49 Guerriero S, Ajossa S, Orozco R , et al. Accuracy of transvaginal ultrasound for diagnosis of deep endometriosis in the rectosigmoid: systematic review and meta-analysis. Ultrasound Obstet Gynecol 2016; 47 (3) 281-289
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 50 Guerriero S, Ajossa S, Minguez JA , et al. Accuracy of transvaginal ultrasound for diagnosis of deep endometriosis in uterosacral ligaments, rectovaginal septum, vagina and bladder: systematic review and meta-analysis. Ultrasound Obstet Gynecol 2015; 46 (5) 534-545
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 51 Dessole S, Farina M, Rubattu G, Cosmi E, Ambrosini G, Nardelli GB. Sonovaginography is a new technique for assessing rectovaginal endometriosis. Fertil Steril 2003; 79 (4) 1023-1027
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 52 Saccardi C, Cosmi E, Borghero A, Tregnaghi A, Dessole S, Litta P. Comparison between transvaginal sonography, saline contrast sonovaginography and magnetic resonance imaging in the diagnosis of posterior deep infiltrating endometriosis. Ultrasound Obstet Gynecol 2012; 40 (4) 464-469
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 53 Reid S, Lu C, Hardy N , et al. Office gel sonovaginography for the prediction of posterior deep infiltrating endometriosis: a multicenter prospective observational study. Ultrasound Obstet Gynecol 2014; 44 (6) 710-718
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 54 Guerriero S, Alcázar JL, Ajossa S, Pilloni M, Melis GB. Three-dimensional sonographic characteristics of deep endometriosis. J Ultrasound Med 2009; 28 (8) 1061-1066
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 55 Guerriero S, Saba L, Ajossa S , et al. Three-dimensional ultrasonography in the diagnosis of deep endometriosis. Hum Reprod 2014; 29 (6) 1189-1198
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 56 Pascual MA, Guerriero S, Hereter L , et al. Diagnosis of endometriosis of the rectovaginal septum using introital three-dimensional ultrasonography. Fertil Steril 2010; 94 (7) 2761-2765
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 57 Pascual MA, Guerriero S, Hereter L , et al. Three-dimensional sonography for diagnosis of rectovaginal septum endometriosis: interobserver agreement. J Ultrasound Med 2013; 32 (6) 931-935
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 58 Fedele L, Bianchi S, Raffaelli R, Portuese A. Pre-operative assessment of bladder endometriosis. Hum Reprod 1997; 12 (11) 2519-2522
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 59 Hudelist G, Ballard K, English J , et al. Transvaginal sonography vs. clinical examination in the preoperative diagnosis of deep infiltrating endometriosis. Ultrasound Obstet Gynecol 2011; 37 (4) 480-487
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 60 Bazot M, Thomassin I, Hourani R, Cortez A, Darai E. Diagnostic accuracy of transvaginal sonography for deep pelvic endometriosis. Ultrasound Obstet Gynecol 2004; 24 (2) 180-185
    Google Scholar
  • 61 Savelli L, Manuzzi L, Pollastri P, Mabrouk M, Seracchioli R, Venturoli S. Diagnostic accuracy and potential limitations of transvaginal sonography for bladder endometriosis. Ultrasound Obstet Gynecol 2009; 34 (5) 595-600
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 62 Maccagnano C, Pellucchi F, Rocchini L , et al. Ureteral endometriosis: proposal for a diagnostic and therapeutic algorithm with a review of the literature. Urol Int 2013; 91 (1) 1-9
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 63 Pateman K, Mavrelos D, Hoo WL, Holland T, Naftalin J, Jurkovic D. Visualization of ureters on standard gynecological transvaginal scan: a feasibility study. Ultrasound Obstet Gynecol 2013; 41 (6) 696-701
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 64 Pateman K, Holland TK, Knez J , et al. Should a detailed ultrasound examination of the complete urinary tract be routinely performed in women with suspected pelvic endometriosis?. Hum Reprod 2015; 30 (12) 2802-2807
    PubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 65 Carmignani L, Vercellini P, Spinelli M, Fontana E, Frontino G, Fedele L. Pelvic endometriosis and hydroureteronephrosis. Fertil Steril 2010; 93 (6) 1741-1744
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 66 Reid S, Condous G. Should ureteric assessment be included in the transvaginal ultrasound assessment for women with suspected endometriosis?. Australas J Ultrasound Med 2015; b; 18: 2
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 67 Knabben L, Imboden S, Fellmann B, Nirgianakis K, Kuhn A, Mueller MD. Urinary tract endometriosis in patients with deep infiltrating endometriosis: prevalence, symptoms, management, and proposal for a new clinical classification. Fertil Steril 2015; 103 (1) 147-152
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 68 Bignardi T, Condous G. Sonorectovaginography: a new sonographic technique for imaging of the posterior compartment of the pelvis. J Ultrasound Med 2008; 27 (10) 1479-1483
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 69 Guerriero S, Ajossa S, Gerada M, Virgilio B, Angioni S, Melis GB. Diagnostic value of transvaginal ‘tenderness-guided’ ultrasonography for the prediction of location of deep endometriosis. Hum Reprod 2008; 23 (11) 2452-2457
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 70 Sokol A, Shveiky D. Clinical anatomy of the vulva, vagina, lower pelvis, and perineum. Glob Libr Women's Med 2008; DOI: 10.3843/GLOWM.10000.
    PubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 71 Hudelist G, Tuttlies F, Rauter G, Pucher S, Keckstein J. Can transvaginal sonography predict infiltration depth in patients with deep infiltrating endometriosis of the rectum?. Hum Reprod 2009; 24 (5) 1012-1017
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 72 Exacoustos C, Manganaro L, Zupi E. Imaging for the evaluation of endometriosis and adenomyosis. Best Pract Res Clin Obstet Gynaecol 2014; 28 (5) 655-681
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 73 Exacoustos C, Malzoni M, Di Giovanni A , et al. Ultrasound mapping system for the surgical management of deep infiltrating endometriosis. Fertil Steril 2014; 102 (1) 143-150.e2
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 74 Abrao MS, Gonçalves MO, Dias Jr JA, Podgaec S, Chamie LP, Blasbalg R. Comparison between clinical examination, transvaginal sonography and magnetic resonance imaging for the diagnosis of deep endometriosis. Hum Reprod 2007; 22 (12) 3092-3097
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 75 Piketty M, Chopin N, Dousset B , et al. Preoperative work-up for patients with deeply infiltrating endometriosis: transvaginal ultrasonography must definitely be the first-line imaging examination. Hum Reprod 2009; 24 (3) 602-607
    Google Scholar
  • 76 Chapron C, Chopin N, Borghese B , et al. Deeply infiltrating endometriosis: pathogenetic implications of the anatomical distribution. Hum Reprod 2006; 21 (7) 1839-1845
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 77 Belghiti J, Thomassin-Naggara I, Zacharopoulou C , et al. Contribution of computed tomography enema and magnetic resonance imaging to diagnose multifocal and multicentric bowel lesions in patients with colorectal endometriosis. J Minim Invasive Gynecol 2015; 22 (5) 776-784
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 78 Rossi L, Palazzo L, Yazbeck C , et al. Can rectal endoscopic sonography be used to predict infiltration depth in patients with deep infiltrating endometriosis of the rectum?. Ultrasound Obstet Gynecol 2014; 43 (3) 322-327
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 79 Koga K, Osuga Y, Yano T , et al. Characteristic images of deeply infiltrating rectosigmoid endometriosis on transvaginal and transrectal ultrasonography. Hum Reprod 2003; 18 (6) 1328-1333
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 80 Bergamini V, Ghezzi F, Scarperi S, Raffaelli R, Cromi A, Franchi M. Preoperative assessment of intestinal endometriosis: a comparison of transvaginal sonography with water-contrast in the rectum, transrectal sonography, and barium enema. Abdom Imaging 2010; 35 (6) 732-736
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 81 Ferrero S, Biscaldi E, Morotti M , et al. Multidetector computerized tomography enteroclysis vs. rectal water contrast transvaginal ultrasonography in determining the presence and extent of bowel endometriosis. Ultrasound Obstet Gynecol 2011; 37 (5) 603-613
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 82 Vercellini P, Consonni D, Dridi D, Bracco B, Frattaruolo MP, Somigliana E. Uterine adenomyosis and in vitro fertilization outcome: a systematic review and meta-analysis. Hum Reprod 2014; 29 (5) 964-977
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 83 Leyendecker G, Wildt L, Mall G. The pathophysiology of endometriosis and adenomyosis: tissue injury and repair. Arch Gynecol Obstet 2009; 280 (4) 529-538
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 84 Dueholm M. Transvaginal ultrasound for diagnosis of adenomyosis: a review. Best Pract Res Clin Obstet Gynaecol 2006; 20 (4) 569-582
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 85 Reinhold C, Tafazoli F, Mehio A , et al. Uterine adenomyosis: endovaginal US and MR imaging features with histopathologic correlation. Radiographics 1999; 19 (Spec No) S147-S160
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 86 Dueholm M, Lundorf E, Hansen ES, Sørensen JS, Ledertoug S, Olesen F. Magnetic resonance imaging and transvaginal ultrasonography for the diagnosis of adenomyosis. Fertil Steril 2001; 76 (3) 588-594
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 87 Bazot M, Cortez A, Darai E , et al. Ultrasonography compared with magnetic resonance imaging for the diagnosis of adenomyosis: correlation with histopathology. Hum Reprod 2001; 16 (11) 2427-2433
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 88 Dueholm M, Lundorf E. Transvaginal ultrasound or MRI for diagnosis of adenomyosis. Curr Opin Obstet Gynecol 2007; 19 (6) 505-512
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 89 Champaneria R, Abedin P, Daniels J, Balogun M, Khan KS. Ultrasound scan and magnetic resonance imaging for the diagnosis of adenomyosis: systematic review comparing test accuracy. Acta Obstet Gynecol Scand 2010; 89 (11) 1374-1384
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 90 Reinhold C, Tafazoli F, Wang L. Imaging features of adenomyosis. Hum Reprod Update 1998; 4 (4) 337-349
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 91 Bromley B, Shipp TD, Benacerraf B. Adenomyosis: sonographic findings and diagnostic accuracy. J Ultrasound Med 2000; 19 (8) 529-534 , quiz 535–536
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 92 Kepkep K, Tuncay YA, Göynümer G, Tutal E. Transvaginal sonography in the diagnosis of adenomyosis: which findings are most accurate?. Ultrasound Obstet Gynecol 2007; 30 (3) 341-345
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 93 Van den Bosch T, Dueholm M, Leone FP , et al. Terms, definitions and measurements to describe sonographic features of myometrium and uterine masses: a consensus opinion from the Morphological Uterus Sonographic Assessment (MUSA) group. Ultrasound Obstet Gynecol 2015; 46 (3) 284-298
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 94 Di Donato N, Bertoldo V, Montanari G, Zannoni L, Caprara G, Seracchioli R. Question mark form of uterus: a simple sonographic sign associated with the presence of adenomyosis. Ultrasound Obstet Gynecol 2015; 46 (1) 126-127
    PubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 95 Fedele L, Bianchi S, Dorta M, Zanotti F, Brioschi D, Carinelli S. Transvaginal ultrasonography in the differential diagnosis of adenomyoma versus leiomyoma. Am J Obstet Gynecol 1992; 167 (3) 603-606
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 96 Brosens I, Gordts S, Habiba M, Benagiano G. Uterine cystic adenomyosis: a disease of younger women. J Pediatr Adolesc Gynecol 2015; 28 (6) 420-426
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 97 Meredith SM, Sanchez-Ramos L, Kaunitz AM. Diagnostic accuracy of transvaginal sonography for the diagnosis of adenomyosis: systematic review and metaanalysis. Am J Obstet Gynecol 2009; 201 (1) 107.e1-107.e6
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 98 Benagiano G, Brosens I. History of adenomyosis. Best Pract Res Clin Obstet Gynaecol 2006; 20 (4) 449-463
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 99 Exacoustos C, Brienza L, Di Giovanni A , et al. Adenomyosis: three-dimensional sonographic findings of the junctional zone and correlation with histology. Ultrasound Obstet Gynecol 2011; 37 (4) 471-479
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 100 Naftalin J, Hoo W, Pateman K, Mavrelos D, Foo X, Jurkovic D. Is adenomyosis associated with menorrhagia?. Hum Reprod 2014; 29 (3) 473-479
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 101 Pinzauti S, Lazzeri L, Tosti C , et al. Transvaginal sonographic features of diffuse adenomyosis in 18-30-year-old nulligravid women without endometriosis: association with symptoms. Ultrasound Obstet Gynecol 2015; 46 (6) 730-736
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 102 Naftalin J, Hoo W, Nunes N, Holland T, Mavrelos D, Jurkovic D. Association between ultrasound features of adenomyosis and severity of menstrual pain. Ultrasound Obstet Gynecol 2016; 47 (6) 779-783
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 103 Bazot M, Daraï E, Rouger J, Detchev R, Cortez A, Uzan S. Limitations of transvaginal sonography for the diagnosis of adenomyosis, with histopathological correlation. Ultrasound Obstet Gynecol 2002; 20 (6) 605-611
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 104 Shrestha A. Risk factors for adenomyosis. J Nepal Health Res Counc 2012; 10 (22) 229-233
    PubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 105 Kunz G, Beil D, Huppert P, Noe M, Kissler S, Leyendecker G. Adenomyosis in endometriosis--prevalence and impact on fertility. Evidence from magnetic resonance imaging. Hum Reprod 2005; 20 (8) 2309-2316
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 106 Luciano DE, Exacoustos C, Albrecht L , et al. Three-dimensional ultrasound in diagnosis of adenomyosis: histologic correlation with ultrasound targeted biopsies of the uterus. J Minim Invasive Gynecol 2013; 20 (6) 803-810
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 107 Naftalin J, Jurkovic D. The endometrial-myometrial junction: a fresh look at a busy crossing. Ultrasound Obstet Gynecol 2009; 34 (1) 1-11
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 108 Larsen SB, Lundorf E, Forman A, Dueholm M. Adenomyosis and junctional zone changes in patients with endometriosis. Eur J Obstet Gynecol Reprod Biol 2011; 157 (2) 206-211
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 109 Benagiano G, Habiba M, Brosens I. The pathophysiology of uterine adenomyosis: an update. Fertil Steril 2012; 98 (3) 572-579
    Google Scholar