{"paper_id":"0cd2f20e-57c4-46ea-b808-a10a7a1b04b4","body_text":"COMPARATIVE DIAGNOSTIC PERFORMANCE OF TRANSVAGINAL ULTRASONOGRAPHY AND MAGNETIC RESONANCE IMAGING IN ADENOMYOSIS: AN EVIDENCE-INTEGRATED REVIEW OF ACCURACY, REAL-WORLD EVIDENCE, AND CLINICAL IMPLEMENTATION\nAuthors/Creators\nDescription\nAdenomyosis is a heterogeneous uterine disorder characterized by endometrial-like tissue within the myometrium. Diagnostic uncertainty has consequences for pain management, heavy menstrual bleeding, infertility counselling, and selection of uterus-sparing therapy. Objective: To critically compare transvaginal ultrasonography (TVUS) and magnetic resonance imaging (MRI), and to establish a rigorous framework for evaluating diagnostic performance in routine care. Methods: This integrative evidence review prioritizes comparative diagnostic meta-analyses, the revised Morphological Uterus Sonographic Assessment (MUSA) consensus, clinical guidance, and relevant methodological and regulatory publications. We distinguish published empirical findings from proposed analytical protocols; no original patient cohort, new meta -analysis, or causal treatment-effect analysis was performed. Results:\nFiles\nXolboyeva M 18-42 MPTTP.pdf\nAdditional details\nReferences\n- 1. Alcázar JL, Vara J, Usandizaga C, Ajossa S, Pascual MA, Guerriero S. Transvaginal ultrasound versus magnetic resonance imaging for diagnosing adenomyosis: a systematic review and head-to-head meta-analysis. Int J Gynaecol Obstet. 2023;161(2):397-405. doi:10.1002/ijgo.14609.\n- 2. Harmsen MJ, Van den Bosch T, de Leeuw RA, et al. Consensus on revised definitions of Morphological Uterus Sonographic Assessment (MUSA) features of adenomyosis: results of modified Delphi procedure. Ultrasound Obstet Gynecol. 2022;60(1):118-131. doi:10.1002/uog.24786.\n- 3. Tellum T, Nygaard S, Lieng M. Noninvasive diagnosis of adenomyosis: a structured review and meta-analysis of diagnostic accuracy in imaging. J Minim Invasive Gynecol. 2020. PMID:31712162. https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/31712162/.\n- 4. Diagnostic accuracy of transvaginal ultrasound and magnetic resonance imaging for adenomyosis: systematic review and meta-analysis and review of sonographic diagnostic criteria. J Ultrasound Med. 2021. PMID:33502767. https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/33502767/.\n- 5. Harada T, Taniguchi F, Guo SW, et al. The Asian Society of Endometriosis and Adenomyosis guidelines for managing adenomyosis. Reprod Med Biol. 2023;22(1):e12535. doi:10.1002/rmb2.12535.","source_license":"CC0","license_restricted":false}