A PHP Error was encountered

Severity: Warning

Message: file_get_contents(https://...@gmail.com&api_key=61f08fa0b96a73de8c900d749fcb997acc09&a=1): Failed to open stream: HTTP request failed! HTTP/1.1 429 Too Many Requests

Filename: helpers/my_audit_helper.php

Line Number: 197

Backtrace:

File: /var/www/html/application/helpers/my_audit_helper.php
Line: 197
Function: file_get_contents

File: /var/www/html/application/helpers/my_audit_helper.php
Line: 271
Function: simplexml_load_file_from_url

File: /var/www/html/application/helpers/my_audit_helper.php
Line: 3165
Function: getPubMedXML

File: /var/www/html/application/controllers/Detail.php
Line: 597
Function: pubMedSearch_Global

File: /var/www/html/application/controllers/Detail.php
Line: 511
Function: pubMedGetRelatedKeyword

File: /var/www/html/index.php
Line: 317
Function: require_once

Tailored compartment-based comparison of transvaginal ultrasound and MRI for suspected deep pelvic endometriosis: a prospective concordance study. | LitMetric

Category Ranking

98%

Total Visits

921

Avg Visit Duration

2 minutes

Citations

20

Article Abstract

Objective: To assess the intermodality agreement between transvaginal ultrasound (TVUS) and magnetic resonance imaging (MRI) in the evaluation of deep pelvic endometriosis (DE), using a compartment-based framework that includes both classical and extended pelvic structures. This study was not designed to assess diagnostic accuracy, as no surgical or histological reference standard was used.

Methods: In this prospective study, 79 symptomatic women with clinical suspicion of DE underwent standardized TVUS and MRI protocols within a 20-day interval. Agreement was analyzed by anatomical compartment using Cohen's Kappa coefficient. Discordant findings (TVUS-only vs. MRI-only) were quantified and tested using McNemar's test. Detection frequencies were also compared using chi-squared tests for paired proportions. In addition to anterior and posterior compartments, we included clinically relevant structures not encompassed by standard classification models. Based on agreement and discordance patterns, each structure was categorized into a descriptive suggestion tier.

Results: Intermodality agreement varied across compartments. Almost perfect agreement was observed for the rectosigmoid (κ = 0.83), and substantial agreement for the rectum (κ = 0.65), rectovaginal septum (κ = 0.68), and ovarian endometriomas (κ ≥ 0.71). Moderate agreement was seen for the uterine serosa (κ = 0.49), vagina (κ = 0.57), bladder (κ = 0.42), and vesicouterine recess (κ = 0.54). TVUS detected significantly more lesions in key regions, including the rectosigmoid (84.8% vs. 64.6%, p = 0.006) and posterior cul-de-sac (53.2% vs. 31.6%, p = 0.010), while MRI showed relative advantages for evaluating the round ligaments and uterine serosa. An exploratory suggestion model (Fig. 1) summarizes these findings.

Conclusion: TVUS and MRI demonstrated substantial concordance across multiple pelvic compartments, particularly when interpreted by expert operators. By extending the compartment-based framework and applying a structured analysis of agreement and detection bias, this study provides insights into the complementary roles of TVUS and MRI in non-invasive DE diagnosis. In the absence of pathological confirmation, these findings should be interpreted as hypothesis-generating and not as measures of diagnostic accuracy.

Download full-text PDF

Source
http://dx.doi.org/10.1007/s00261-025-05103-7DOI Listing

Publication Analysis

Top Keywords

tvus mri
12
transvaginal ultrasound
8
deep pelvic
8
pelvic endometriosis
8
agreement
8
intermodality agreement
8
compartment-based framework
8
diagnostic accuracy
8
uterine serosa
8
mri
6

Similar Publications