Skip to main content
Top
Published in: European Radiology 2/2014

01-02-2014 | Urogenital

Diagnostic confidence analysis in the magnetic resonance imaging of ovarian and deep endometriosis: comparison with surgical results

Authors: Luca Saba, Rosa Sulcis, Gian Benedetto Melis, Giannina Ibba, Juan Luis Alcazar, Mario Piga, Stefano Guerriero

Published in: European Radiology | Issue 2/2014

Login to get access

Abstract

Objective

To assess the diagnostic confidence of multiple readers in the magnetic resonance imaging (MRI) diagnosis of endometriosis.

Methods

Sixty-five patients (mean age 33; range 19–45 years) who had undergone MRI were retrospectively evaluated. Five regions were analysed and the presence of endometriosis was scored on a five-point scale in order to assess the diagnostic confidence. Statistical analysis included receiver operating characteristic (ROC) curve analysis, the Cohen weighted test and sensitivity, specificity, positive predictive value (PPV), negative predictive value (NPV), accuracy, positive likelihood ratio (LR+) and negative likelihood ratio (LR–).

Results

The areas under the curve (AUC) in the detection of ovarian endometrioma were 0.942, 0.893 and 0.883 for readers 1, 2 and 3, respectively; in the uterosacral ligament (USL) AUCs were 0.907, 0.804 and 0.842; in the vaginal fornix (VF) 0.819, 0.733 and 0.69; in the anterior compartment 0.916, 0.833 and 0.873; and in the rectum/sigma/pouch of Douglas (RSD) 0.936, 0.856 and 0.834.

Conclusions

Diagnostic confidence of the observers is different according to the region of the nodules of endometriosis and it can be challenging in the VF and for the less experience readers also in the AC and RSD. Moreover the degree of uncertain diagnosis for the less expert readers may reach up to one third of the examinations.

Key points

Magnetic resonance imaging (MRI) is increasingly used to assess endometriosis
The diagnostic confidence of observers varies according to the location of endometriosis
The diagnosis is more difficult to establish by MRI in some anatomical locations
Specific training should be given concerning those locations that cause difficulty
Literature
3.
go back to reference Macario S, Chassang M, Novellas S et al (2012) The value of pelvic MRI in the diagnosis of posterior cul-de-sac obliteration in cases of deep pelvic endometriosis. AJR Am J Roentgenol 199:1410–1415PubMedCrossRef Macario S, Chassang M, Novellas S et al (2012) The value of pelvic MRI in the diagnosis of posterior cul-de-sac obliteration in cases of deep pelvic endometriosis. AJR Am J Roentgenol 199:1410–1415PubMedCrossRef
4.
go back to reference Siegelman ES, Oliver ER (2012) MR imaging of endometriosis: ten imaging pearls. Radiographics 32:1675–1691PubMedCrossRef Siegelman ES, Oliver ER (2012) MR imaging of endometriosis: ten imaging pearls. Radiographics 32:1675–1691PubMedCrossRef
5.
go back to reference Guerriero S, Ajossa S, Garau N, Alcazar JL, Mais V, Melis GB (2010) Diagnosis of pelvic adhesions in patients with endometrioma: the role of transvaginal ultrasonography. Fertil Steril 94:742–746PubMedCrossRef Guerriero S, Ajossa S, Garau N, Alcazar JL, Mais V, Melis GB (2010) Diagnosis of pelvic adhesions in patients with endometrioma: the role of transvaginal ultrasonography. Fertil Steril 94:742–746PubMedCrossRef
6.
go back to reference Saba L, Guerriero S, Sulcis R et al (2012) MRI and "tenderness guided" transvaginal ultrasonography in the diagnosis of recto-sigmoid endometriosis. J Magn Reson Imaging 35:352–360PubMedCrossRef Saba L, Guerriero S, Sulcis R et al (2012) MRI and "tenderness guided" transvaginal ultrasonography in the diagnosis of recto-sigmoid endometriosis. J Magn Reson Imaging 35:352–360PubMedCrossRef
7.
go back to reference Bazot M, Gasner A, Ballester M, Daraï E (2011) Value of thin-section oblique axial T2-weighted magnetic resonance images to assess uterosacral ligament endometriosis. Hum Reprod 26:346–353PubMedCrossRef Bazot M, Gasner A, Ballester M, Daraï E (2011) Value of thin-section oblique axial T2-weighted magnetic resonance images to assess uterosacral ligament endometriosis. Hum Reprod 26:346–353PubMedCrossRef
8.
go back to reference Scardapane A, Bettocchi S, Lorusso F et al (2011) Diagnosis of colorectal endometriosis: contribution of contrast enhanced MR-colonography. Eur Radiol 21:1553–1563PubMedCrossRef Scardapane A, Bettocchi S, Lorusso F et al (2011) Diagnosis of colorectal endometriosis: contribution of contrast enhanced MR-colonography. Eur Radiol 21:1553–1563PubMedCrossRef
9.
go back to reference Busard MP, Mijatovic V, van Kuijk C, Hompes PG, van Waesberghe JH (2010) Appearance of abdominal wall endometriosis on MR imaging. Eur Radiol 20:1267–1276PubMedCentralPubMedCrossRef Busard MP, Mijatovic V, van Kuijk C, Hompes PG, van Waesberghe JH (2010) Appearance of abdominal wall endometriosis on MR imaging. Eur Radiol 20:1267–1276PubMedCentralPubMedCrossRef
10.
go back to reference Chassang M, Novellas S, Bloch-Marcotte C et al (2010) Utility of vaginal and rectal contrast medium in MRI for the detection of deep pelvic endometriosis. Eur Radiol 20:1003–1010PubMedCrossRef Chassang M, Novellas S, Bloch-Marcotte C et al (2010) Utility of vaginal and rectal contrast medium in MRI for the detection of deep pelvic endometriosis. Eur Radiol 20:1003–1010PubMedCrossRef
11.
go back to reference Saba L, Guerriero S, Sulcis R, Ajossa S, Melis G, Mallarini G (2010) Agreement and reproducibility in identification of endometriosis using magnetic resonance imaging. Acta Radiol 51:573–580PubMedCrossRef Saba L, Guerriero S, Sulcis R, Ajossa S, Melis G, Mallarini G (2010) Agreement and reproducibility in identification of endometriosis using magnetic resonance imaging. Acta Radiol 51:573–580PubMedCrossRef
12.
go back to reference Saba L, Guerriero S, Sulis R et al (2011) Learning curve in the detection of ovarian and deep endometriosis by using magnetic resonance: comparison with surgical results. Eur J Radiol 79:237–244PubMedCrossRef Saba L, Guerriero S, Sulis R et al (2011) Learning curve in the detection of ovarian and deep endometriosis by using magnetic resonance: comparison with surgical results. Eur J Radiol 79:237–244PubMedCrossRef
13.
go back to reference Ng CS, Palmer CR (2007) Analysis of diagnostic confidence and diagnostic accuracy: a unified framework. Br J Radiol 80:152–160PubMedCrossRef Ng CS, Palmer CR (2007) Analysis of diagnostic confidence and diagnostic accuracy: a unified framework. Br J Radiol 80:152–160PubMedCrossRef
14.
go back to reference Brealey SD, Scally AJ, Hahn S, Godfrey C (2007) Evidence of reference standard related bias in studies of plain radiograph reading performance: a meta-regression. Br J Radiol 80:406–413PubMedCrossRef Brealey SD, Scally AJ, Hahn S, Godfrey C (2007) Evidence of reference standard related bias in studies of plain radiograph reading performance: a meta-regression. Br J Radiol 80:406–413PubMedCrossRef
15.
go back to reference Rennie D (2003) Improving reports of studies of diagnostic tests: the STARD initiative. JAMA 289(1):89–90PubMedCrossRef Rennie D (2003) Improving reports of studies of diagnostic tests: the STARD initiative. JAMA 289(1):89–90PubMedCrossRef
17.
go back to reference Zawin M, McCarthy S, Scoutt L (1989) Endometriosis: appearance and detection at MR imaging. Radiology 171:693–696PubMed Zawin M, McCarthy S, Scoutt L (1989) Endometriosis: appearance and detection at MR imaging. Radiology 171:693–696PubMed
18.
go back to reference Zacharia TT, O’Neill MJ (2006) Prevalence and distribution of adnexal findings suggesting endometriosis in patients with MR diagnosis of adenomyosis. Br J Radiol 79:303–307PubMedCrossRef Zacharia TT, O’Neill MJ (2006) Prevalence and distribution of adnexal findings suggesting endometriosis in patients with MR diagnosis of adenomyosis. Br J Radiol 79:303–307PubMedCrossRef
19.
go back to reference Bazot M, Darai E, Hourani R et al (2004) Deep pelvic endometriosis: MR imaging for diagnosis and prediction of extension of disease. Radiology 232:379–389PubMedCrossRef Bazot M, Darai E, Hourani R et al (2004) Deep pelvic endometriosis: MR imaging for diagnosis and prediction of extension of disease. Radiology 232:379–389PubMedCrossRef
20.
go back to reference Redwine DB (1987) The distribution of endometriosis in the pelvis by age groups and fertility. Fertil Steril 47:173–175PubMed Redwine DB (1987) The distribution of endometriosis in the pelvis by age groups and fertility. Fertil Steril 47:173–175PubMed
21.
go back to reference Kinkel K, Chapron C, Balleyguier C (1999) Magnetic resonance imaging characteristics of deep endometriosis. Hum Reprod 14:1080–1086PubMedCrossRef Kinkel K, Chapron C, Balleyguier C (1999) Magnetic resonance imaging characteristics of deep endometriosis. Hum Reprod 14:1080–1086PubMedCrossRef
22.
go back to reference Guerriero S, Alcázar JL, Ajossa S, Pilloni M, Melis GB (2009) Three-dimensional sonographic characteristics of deep endometriosis. J Ultrasound Med 28:1061–1066PubMed Guerriero S, Alcázar JL, Ajossa S, Pilloni M, Melis GB (2009) Three-dimensional sonographic characteristics of deep endometriosis. J Ultrasound Med 28:1061–1066PubMed
Metadata
Title
Diagnostic confidence analysis in the magnetic resonance imaging of ovarian and deep endometriosis: comparison with surgical results
Authors
Luca Saba
Rosa Sulcis
Gian Benedetto Melis
Giannina Ibba
Juan Luis Alcazar
Mario Piga
Stefano Guerriero
Publication date
01-02-2014
Publisher
Springer Berlin Heidelberg
Published in
European Radiology / Issue 2/2014
Print ISSN: 0938-7994
Electronic ISSN: 1432-1084
DOI
https://doi.org/10.1007/s00330-013-3013-9

Other articles of this Issue 2/2014

European Radiology 2/2014 Go to the issue