Loading…
Accuracy of three‐dimensional ultrasound compared with magnetic resonance imaging in diagnosis of Müllerian duct anomalies using ESHRE–ESGE consensus on the classification of congenital anomalies of the female genital tract
Objective To establish the accuracy of three‐dimensional ultrasound (3D‐US), compared with magnetic resonance imaging (MRI), for diagnosing uterine anomalies, using the European Society of Human Reproduction and Embryology–European Society for Gynaecological Endoscopy (ESHRE–ESGE) consensus on the c...
Saved in:
Published in: | Ultrasound in obstetrics & gynecology 2015-11, Vol.46 (5), p.616-622 |
---|---|
Main Authors: | , , , , , , |
Format: | Article |
Language: | English |
Subjects: | |
Citations: | Items that this one cites Items that cite this one |
Online Access: | Get full text |
Tags: |
Add Tag
No Tags, Be the first to tag this record!
|
cited_by | cdi_FETCH-LOGICAL-c3885-49710cf71c911fb478b2a4bc169b885e17e82bf8fa5fd403e149e9771e54b6c33 |
---|---|
cites | cdi_FETCH-LOGICAL-c3885-49710cf71c911fb478b2a4bc169b885e17e82bf8fa5fd403e149e9771e54b6c33 |
container_end_page | 622 |
container_issue | 5 |
container_start_page | 616 |
container_title | Ultrasound in obstetrics & gynecology |
container_volume | 46 |
creator | Graupera, B. Pascual, M. A. Hereter, L. Browne, J. L. Úbeda, B. Rodríguez, I. Pedrero, C. |
description | Objective
To establish the accuracy of three‐dimensional ultrasound (3D‐US), compared with magnetic resonance imaging (MRI), for diagnosing uterine anomalies, using the European Society of Human Reproduction and Embryology–European Society for Gynaecological Endoscopy (ESHRE–ESGE) consensus on the classification of congenital anomalies of the female genital tract.
Methods
Sixty women with uterine anomalies suspected after examination by conventional two‐dimensional ultrasound were evaluated with 3D‐US and MRI. These data were analyzed retrospectively to confirm the presence and type of uterine malformation in accordance with the ESHRE–ESGE consensus. Sensitivity, specificity and positive (PPV) and negative (NPV) predictive values were calculated, using MRI as the gold standard, and agreement between the two methods was evaluated by kappa index.
Results
Compared with MRI, for the diagnosis of normal uteri, 3D‐US had a sensitivity of 83.3%, specificity of 100%, PPV of 100%, NPV of 98.2% and kappa index of 0.900. For dysmorphic uteri and for hemi‐uteri, the sensitivity, specificity, PPV and NPV were all 100%, and kappa was 1.00. For septate uteri, the sensitivity was 100%, specificity was 88.9%, PPV was 95.5%, NPV was 100% and kappa was 0.918. For bicorporeal uteri, the sensitivity was 83.3%, specificity was 100%, PPV was 100%, NPV was 98.2% and kappa was 0.900.
Conclusions
3D‐US is highly accurate for diagnosing uterine malformations, having a good level of agreement with MRI in the classification of different anomaly types based on the ESHRE–ESGE consensus. Copyright © 2015 ISUOG. Published by John Wiley & Sons Ltd. |
doi_str_mv | 10.1002/uog.14825 |
format | article |
fullrecord | <record><control><sourceid>proquest_cross</sourceid><recordid>TN_cdi_proquest_miscellaneous_1730025834</recordid><sourceformat>XML</sourceformat><sourcesystem>PC</sourcesystem><sourcerecordid>1730025834</sourcerecordid><originalsourceid>FETCH-LOGICAL-c3885-49710cf71c911fb478b2a4bc169b885e17e82bf8fa5fd403e149e9771e54b6c33</originalsourceid><addsrcrecordid>eNp1kcFu1DAQhiMEokvhwAsgS1zoYVs7ceL4WFVhi1RUidJz5DjjravEXuxY1d76CEi8Tm-8ScWDMOm2ICFxsmbm8z-_5s-yt4weMkrzo-TXh4zXefksWzBeySUVtHyeLais6FJUMt_LXsV4TSmteFG9zPbyspK0oGKR_TrWOgWlt8QbMl0FgPvb770dwUXrnRpIGqagok-uJ9qPGxWgJzd2uiKjWjuYrCYBIpJOA7HYs25NrCO9xbGPNs66n3_eDQMEq7Cf9ESU86MaLESS4sw3F6dfmvvbH83FqsEtLuL2hD8dOgKiBxWjNVarCS3NeoiswdkJ7f2VevAPxADWQJ7maF5Pr7MXRg0R3jy--9nlx-bryeny7Hz16eT4bKmLui6XXApGtRFMS8ZMx0Xd5Yp3mlWywzkwAXXemdqo0vScFsC4BCkEg5J3lS6K_ezDTncT_LcEcWpHGzUMg3LgU2yZKDCusi44ou__Qa99CnjwmcprmZesFkgd7CgdfIwBTLsJeOSwbRlt5-hbjL59iB7Zd4-KqRuh_0M-ZY3A0Q64sQNs_6_UXp6vdpK_AUBfv94</addsrcrecordid><sourcetype>Aggregation Database</sourcetype><iscdi>true</iscdi><recordtype>article</recordtype><pqid>1728925187</pqid></control><display><type>article</type><title>Accuracy of three‐dimensional ultrasound compared with magnetic resonance imaging in diagnosis of Müllerian duct anomalies using ESHRE–ESGE consensus on the classification of congenital anomalies of the female genital tract</title><source>Wiley-Blackwell Read & Publish Collection</source><creator>Graupera, B. ; Pascual, M. A. ; Hereter, L. ; Browne, J. L. ; Úbeda, B. ; Rodríguez, I. ; Pedrero, C.</creator><creatorcontrib>Graupera, B. ; Pascual, M. A. ; Hereter, L. ; Browne, J. L. ; Úbeda, B. ; Rodríguez, I. ; Pedrero, C.</creatorcontrib><description>Objective
To establish the accuracy of three‐dimensional ultrasound (3D‐US), compared with magnetic resonance imaging (MRI), for diagnosing uterine anomalies, using the European Society of Human Reproduction and Embryology–European Society for Gynaecological Endoscopy (ESHRE–ESGE) consensus on the classification of congenital anomalies of the female genital tract.
Methods
Sixty women with uterine anomalies suspected after examination by conventional two‐dimensional ultrasound were evaluated with 3D‐US and MRI. These data were analyzed retrospectively to confirm the presence and type of uterine malformation in accordance with the ESHRE–ESGE consensus. Sensitivity, specificity and positive (PPV) and negative (NPV) predictive values were calculated, using MRI as the gold standard, and agreement between the two methods was evaluated by kappa index.
Results
Compared with MRI, for the diagnosis of normal uteri, 3D‐US had a sensitivity of 83.3%, specificity of 100%, PPV of 100%, NPV of 98.2% and kappa index of 0.900. For dysmorphic uteri and for hemi‐uteri, the sensitivity, specificity, PPV and NPV were all 100%, and kappa was 1.00. For septate uteri, the sensitivity was 100%, specificity was 88.9%, PPV was 95.5%, NPV was 100% and kappa was 0.918. For bicorporeal uteri, the sensitivity was 83.3%, specificity was 100%, PPV was 100%, NPV was 98.2% and kappa was 0.900.
Conclusions
3D‐US is highly accurate for diagnosing uterine malformations, having a good level of agreement with MRI in the classification of different anomaly types based on the ESHRE–ESGE consensus. Copyright © 2015 ISUOG. Published by John Wiley & Sons Ltd.</description><identifier>ISSN: 0960-7692</identifier><identifier>EISSN: 1469-0705</identifier><identifier>DOI: 10.1002/uog.14825</identifier><identifier>PMID: 25690307</identifier><identifier>CODEN: UOGYFJ</identifier><language>eng</language><publisher>Chichester, UK: John Wiley & Sons, Ltd</publisher><subject>3D‐US ; Cervix Uteri - abnormalities ; Cervix Uteri - pathology ; congenital uterine anomalies ; Female ; Humans ; magnetic resonance imaging ; Mullerian Ducts - abnormalities ; Mullerian Ducts - pathology ; Müllerian duct anomalies ; Reproducibility of Results ; Retrospective Studies ; Societies, Medical ; three‐dimensional ultrasonography ; Urogenital Abnormalities - diagnosis ; Urogenital Abnormalities - pathology ; uterine abnormalities ; uterine malformations ; Uterus - abnormalities ; Uterus - pathology ; Vagina - abnormalities ; Vagina - pathology</subject><ispartof>Ultrasound in obstetrics & gynecology, 2015-11, Vol.46 (5), p.616-622</ispartof><rights>Copyright © 2015 ISUOG. Published by John Wiley & Sons Ltd.</rights><rights>Copyright © 2015 ISUOG. Published by John Wiley & Sons Ltd</rights><lds50>peer_reviewed</lds50><oa>free_for_read</oa><woscitedreferencessubscribed>false</woscitedreferencessubscribed><citedby>FETCH-LOGICAL-c3885-49710cf71c911fb478b2a4bc169b885e17e82bf8fa5fd403e149e9771e54b6c33</citedby><cites>FETCH-LOGICAL-c3885-49710cf71c911fb478b2a4bc169b885e17e82bf8fa5fd403e149e9771e54b6c33</cites></display><links><openurl>$$Topenurl_article</openurl><openurlfulltext>$$Topenurlfull_article</openurlfulltext><thumbnail>$$Tsyndetics_thumb_exl</thumbnail><link.rule.ids>314,780,784,27924,27925</link.rule.ids><backlink>$$Uhttps://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/25690307$$D View this record in MEDLINE/PubMed$$Hfree_for_read</backlink></links><search><creatorcontrib>Graupera, B.</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Pascual, M. A.</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Hereter, L.</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Browne, J. L.</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Úbeda, B.</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Rodríguez, I.</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Pedrero, C.</creatorcontrib><title>Accuracy of three‐dimensional ultrasound compared with magnetic resonance imaging in diagnosis of Müllerian duct anomalies using ESHRE–ESGE consensus on the classification of congenital anomalies of the female genital tract</title><title>Ultrasound in obstetrics & gynecology</title><addtitle>Ultrasound Obstet Gynecol</addtitle><description>Objective
To establish the accuracy of three‐dimensional ultrasound (3D‐US), compared with magnetic resonance imaging (MRI), for diagnosing uterine anomalies, using the European Society of Human Reproduction and Embryology–European Society for Gynaecological Endoscopy (ESHRE–ESGE) consensus on the classification of congenital anomalies of the female genital tract.
Methods
Sixty women with uterine anomalies suspected after examination by conventional two‐dimensional ultrasound were evaluated with 3D‐US and MRI. These data were analyzed retrospectively to confirm the presence and type of uterine malformation in accordance with the ESHRE–ESGE consensus. Sensitivity, specificity and positive (PPV) and negative (NPV) predictive values were calculated, using MRI as the gold standard, and agreement between the two methods was evaluated by kappa index.
Results
Compared with MRI, for the diagnosis of normal uteri, 3D‐US had a sensitivity of 83.3%, specificity of 100%, PPV of 100%, NPV of 98.2% and kappa index of 0.900. For dysmorphic uteri and for hemi‐uteri, the sensitivity, specificity, PPV and NPV were all 100%, and kappa was 1.00. For septate uteri, the sensitivity was 100%, specificity was 88.9%, PPV was 95.5%, NPV was 100% and kappa was 0.918. For bicorporeal uteri, the sensitivity was 83.3%, specificity was 100%, PPV was 100%, NPV was 98.2% and kappa was 0.900.
Conclusions
3D‐US is highly accurate for diagnosing uterine malformations, having a good level of agreement with MRI in the classification of different anomaly types based on the ESHRE–ESGE consensus. Copyright © 2015 ISUOG. Published by John Wiley & Sons Ltd.</description><subject>3D‐US</subject><subject>Cervix Uteri - abnormalities</subject><subject>Cervix Uteri - pathology</subject><subject>congenital uterine anomalies</subject><subject>Female</subject><subject>Humans</subject><subject>magnetic resonance imaging</subject><subject>Mullerian Ducts - abnormalities</subject><subject>Mullerian Ducts - pathology</subject><subject>Müllerian duct anomalies</subject><subject>Reproducibility of Results</subject><subject>Retrospective Studies</subject><subject>Societies, Medical</subject><subject>three‐dimensional ultrasonography</subject><subject>Urogenital Abnormalities - diagnosis</subject><subject>Urogenital Abnormalities - pathology</subject><subject>uterine abnormalities</subject><subject>uterine malformations</subject><subject>Uterus - abnormalities</subject><subject>Uterus - pathology</subject><subject>Vagina - abnormalities</subject><subject>Vagina - pathology</subject><issn>0960-7692</issn><issn>1469-0705</issn><fulltext>true</fulltext><rsrctype>article</rsrctype><creationdate>2015</creationdate><recordtype>article</recordtype><recordid>eNp1kcFu1DAQhiMEokvhwAsgS1zoYVs7ceL4WFVhi1RUidJz5DjjravEXuxY1d76CEi8Tm-8ScWDMOm2ICFxsmbm8z-_5s-yt4weMkrzo-TXh4zXefksWzBeySUVtHyeLais6FJUMt_LXsV4TSmteFG9zPbyspK0oGKR_TrWOgWlt8QbMl0FgPvb770dwUXrnRpIGqagok-uJ9qPGxWgJzd2uiKjWjuYrCYBIpJOA7HYs25NrCO9xbGPNs66n3_eDQMEq7Cf9ESU86MaLESS4sw3F6dfmvvbH83FqsEtLuL2hD8dOgKiBxWjNVarCS3NeoiswdkJ7f2VevAPxADWQJ7maF5Pr7MXRg0R3jy--9nlx-bryeny7Hz16eT4bKmLui6XXApGtRFMS8ZMx0Xd5Yp3mlWywzkwAXXemdqo0vScFsC4BCkEg5J3lS6K_ezDTncT_LcEcWpHGzUMg3LgU2yZKDCusi44ou__Qa99CnjwmcprmZesFkgd7CgdfIwBTLsJeOSwbRlt5-hbjL59iB7Zd4-KqRuh_0M-ZY3A0Q64sQNs_6_UXp6vdpK_AUBfv94</recordid><startdate>201511</startdate><enddate>201511</enddate><creator>Graupera, B.</creator><creator>Pascual, M. A.</creator><creator>Hereter, L.</creator><creator>Browne, J. L.</creator><creator>Úbeda, B.</creator><creator>Rodríguez, I.</creator><creator>Pedrero, C.</creator><general>John Wiley & Sons, Ltd</general><general>Wiley Subscription Services, Inc</general><scope>CGR</scope><scope>CUY</scope><scope>CVF</scope><scope>ECM</scope><scope>EIF</scope><scope>NPM</scope><scope>AAYXX</scope><scope>CITATION</scope><scope>7QO</scope><scope>8FD</scope><scope>FR3</scope><scope>K9.</scope><scope>P64</scope><scope>7X8</scope></search><sort><creationdate>201511</creationdate><title>Accuracy of three‐dimensional ultrasound compared with magnetic resonance imaging in diagnosis of Müllerian duct anomalies using ESHRE–ESGE consensus on the classification of congenital anomalies of the female genital tract</title><author>Graupera, B. ; Pascual, M. A. ; Hereter, L. ; Browne, J. L. ; Úbeda, B. ; Rodríguez, I. ; Pedrero, C.</author></sort><facets><frbrtype>5</frbrtype><frbrgroupid>cdi_FETCH-LOGICAL-c3885-49710cf71c911fb478b2a4bc169b885e17e82bf8fa5fd403e149e9771e54b6c33</frbrgroupid><rsrctype>articles</rsrctype><prefilter>articles</prefilter><language>eng</language><creationdate>2015</creationdate><topic>3D‐US</topic><topic>Cervix Uteri - abnormalities</topic><topic>Cervix Uteri - pathology</topic><topic>congenital uterine anomalies</topic><topic>Female</topic><topic>Humans</topic><topic>magnetic resonance imaging</topic><topic>Mullerian Ducts - abnormalities</topic><topic>Mullerian Ducts - pathology</topic><topic>Müllerian duct anomalies</topic><topic>Reproducibility of Results</topic><topic>Retrospective Studies</topic><topic>Societies, Medical</topic><topic>three‐dimensional ultrasonography</topic><topic>Urogenital Abnormalities - diagnosis</topic><topic>Urogenital Abnormalities - pathology</topic><topic>uterine abnormalities</topic><topic>uterine malformations</topic><topic>Uterus - abnormalities</topic><topic>Uterus - pathology</topic><topic>Vagina - abnormalities</topic><topic>Vagina - pathology</topic><toplevel>peer_reviewed</toplevel><toplevel>online_resources</toplevel><creatorcontrib>Graupera, B.</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Pascual, M. A.</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Hereter, L.</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Browne, J. L.</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Úbeda, B.</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Rodríguez, I.</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Pedrero, C.</creatorcontrib><collection>Medline</collection><collection>MEDLINE</collection><collection>MEDLINE (Ovid)</collection><collection>MEDLINE</collection><collection>MEDLINE</collection><collection>PubMed</collection><collection>CrossRef</collection><collection>Biotechnology Research Abstracts</collection><collection>Technology Research Database</collection><collection>Engineering Research Database</collection><collection>ProQuest Health & Medical Complete (Alumni)</collection><collection>Biotechnology and BioEngineering Abstracts</collection><collection>MEDLINE - Academic</collection><jtitle>Ultrasound in obstetrics & gynecology</jtitle></facets><delivery><delcategory>Remote Search Resource</delcategory><fulltext>fulltext</fulltext></delivery><addata><au>Graupera, B.</au><au>Pascual, M. A.</au><au>Hereter, L.</au><au>Browne, J. L.</au><au>Úbeda, B.</au><au>Rodríguez, I.</au><au>Pedrero, C.</au><format>journal</format><genre>article</genre><ristype>JOUR</ristype><atitle>Accuracy of three‐dimensional ultrasound compared with magnetic resonance imaging in diagnosis of Müllerian duct anomalies using ESHRE–ESGE consensus on the classification of congenital anomalies of the female genital tract</atitle><jtitle>Ultrasound in obstetrics & gynecology</jtitle><addtitle>Ultrasound Obstet Gynecol</addtitle><date>2015-11</date><risdate>2015</risdate><volume>46</volume><issue>5</issue><spage>616</spage><epage>622</epage><pages>616-622</pages><issn>0960-7692</issn><eissn>1469-0705</eissn><coden>UOGYFJ</coden><abstract>Objective
To establish the accuracy of three‐dimensional ultrasound (3D‐US), compared with magnetic resonance imaging (MRI), for diagnosing uterine anomalies, using the European Society of Human Reproduction and Embryology–European Society for Gynaecological Endoscopy (ESHRE–ESGE) consensus on the classification of congenital anomalies of the female genital tract.
Methods
Sixty women with uterine anomalies suspected after examination by conventional two‐dimensional ultrasound were evaluated with 3D‐US and MRI. These data were analyzed retrospectively to confirm the presence and type of uterine malformation in accordance with the ESHRE–ESGE consensus. Sensitivity, specificity and positive (PPV) and negative (NPV) predictive values were calculated, using MRI as the gold standard, and agreement between the two methods was evaluated by kappa index.
Results
Compared with MRI, for the diagnosis of normal uteri, 3D‐US had a sensitivity of 83.3%, specificity of 100%, PPV of 100%, NPV of 98.2% and kappa index of 0.900. For dysmorphic uteri and for hemi‐uteri, the sensitivity, specificity, PPV and NPV were all 100%, and kappa was 1.00. For septate uteri, the sensitivity was 100%, specificity was 88.9%, PPV was 95.5%, NPV was 100% and kappa was 0.918. For bicorporeal uteri, the sensitivity was 83.3%, specificity was 100%, PPV was 100%, NPV was 98.2% and kappa was 0.900.
Conclusions
3D‐US is highly accurate for diagnosing uterine malformations, having a good level of agreement with MRI in the classification of different anomaly types based on the ESHRE–ESGE consensus. Copyright © 2015 ISUOG. Published by John Wiley & Sons Ltd.</abstract><cop>Chichester, UK</cop><pub>John Wiley & Sons, Ltd</pub><pmid>25690307</pmid><doi>10.1002/uog.14825</doi><tpages>7</tpages><oa>free_for_read</oa></addata></record> |
fulltext | fulltext |
identifier | ISSN: 0960-7692 |
ispartof | Ultrasound in obstetrics & gynecology, 2015-11, Vol.46 (5), p.616-622 |
issn | 0960-7692 1469-0705 |
language | eng |
recordid | cdi_proquest_miscellaneous_1730025834 |
source | Wiley-Blackwell Read & Publish Collection |
subjects | 3D‐US Cervix Uteri - abnormalities Cervix Uteri - pathology congenital uterine anomalies Female Humans magnetic resonance imaging Mullerian Ducts - abnormalities Mullerian Ducts - pathology Müllerian duct anomalies Reproducibility of Results Retrospective Studies Societies, Medical three‐dimensional ultrasonography Urogenital Abnormalities - diagnosis Urogenital Abnormalities - pathology uterine abnormalities uterine malformations Uterus - abnormalities Uterus - pathology Vagina - abnormalities Vagina - pathology |
title | Accuracy of three‐dimensional ultrasound compared with magnetic resonance imaging in diagnosis of Müllerian duct anomalies using ESHRE–ESGE consensus on the classification of congenital anomalies of the female genital tract |
url | http://sfxeu10.hosted.exlibrisgroup.com/loughborough?ctx_ver=Z39.88-2004&ctx_enc=info:ofi/enc:UTF-8&ctx_tim=2025-01-04T20%3A47%3A23IST&url_ver=Z39.88-2004&url_ctx_fmt=infofi/fmt:kev:mtx:ctx&rfr_id=info:sid/primo.exlibrisgroup.com:primo3-Article-proquest_cross&rft_val_fmt=info:ofi/fmt:kev:mtx:journal&rft.genre=article&rft.atitle=Accuracy%20of%20three%E2%80%90dimensional%20ultrasound%20compared%20with%20magnetic%20resonance%20imaging%20in%20diagnosis%20of%20M%C3%BCllerian%20duct%20anomalies%20using%20ESHRE%E2%80%93ESGE%20consensus%20on%20the%20classification%20of%20congenital%20anomalies%20of%20the%20female%20genital%20tract&rft.jtitle=Ultrasound%20in%20obstetrics%20&%20gynecology&rft.au=Graupera,%20B.&rft.date=2015-11&rft.volume=46&rft.issue=5&rft.spage=616&rft.epage=622&rft.pages=616-622&rft.issn=0960-7692&rft.eissn=1469-0705&rft.coden=UOGYFJ&rft_id=info:doi/10.1002/uog.14825&rft_dat=%3Cproquest_cross%3E1730025834%3C/proquest_cross%3E%3Cgrp_id%3Ecdi_FETCH-LOGICAL-c3885-49710cf71c911fb478b2a4bc169b885e17e82bf8fa5fd403e149e9771e54b6c33%3C/grp_id%3E%3Coa%3E%3C/oa%3E%3Curl%3E%3C/url%3E&rft_id=info:oai/&rft_pqid=1728925187&rft_id=info:pmid/25690307&rfr_iscdi=true |