{"paper_id":"2d45e635-487f-4487-a0a2-2a6891852272","body_text":"Abstract\nPurpose\nTo compare the diagnostic accuracy of transvaginal sonography (TVS) and computed tomography–colonography with contrast media and urographic phase (CTCU) in the preoperative detection of deep infiltrating endometriosis (DIE).\nMaterials and methods\nForty-seven patients with clinical suspicion of DIE underwent preoperative TVS and CTCU. Imaging data were compared with histopathologic analysis. Sensitivity, specificity, positive and negative predictive values and test accuracies of the two modalities were calculated.\nResults\nFor diagnosing intestinal DIE, TVS and CTCU had a sensitivity of 98 and 71%, specificity of 33 and 50%, positive predictive value of 91 and 91%, negative predictive value of 67 and 20%, accuracy of 89 and 68%, respectively. For diagnosing ureteral DIE, TVS and CTCU had a sensitivity of 10 and 60%, specificity of 94.8 and 70.2% on the right; sensitivity of 28.5 and 57.1%, specificity of 96.3 and 76.9% on the left, respectively.\nConclusion\nTVS should be regarded as an accurate, radiation-free first-line diagnostic modality for patients with suspicion of posterior endometriosis. CTCU should be regarded as a complementary imaging modality, particularly for sigmoid or ureteral endometriosis.\nSimilar content being viewed by others\nReferences\nCornillie FJ, Oosterlynck D, Lauweryns JM, Koninckx PR. Deeply infiltrating pelvic endometriosis: histology and clinical significance. Fertil Steril. 1990;53:978–83.\nChapron C, Fauconnier A, Vieira M, Barakat H, Dousset B, Pansini V, et al. Anatomical distribution of deeply infiltrating endometriosis: surgical implications and proposition for a classification. Hum Reprod. 2003;18:157–61.\nNisenblat V, Bossuyt PMM, Farquhar C, Johnson N, Hull ML. Imaging modalities for the non-invasive diagnosis of endometriosis. Cochrane Database Syst Rev. 2016;2:CD009591.\nBazot M, Thomassin I, Hourani R, Cortez A, Darai E. Diagnostic accuracy of transvaginal sonography for deep pelvic endometriosis. Ultrasound Obstet Gynecol. 2004;24:180–5.\nSavelli L. Transvaginal sonography for the assessment of ovarian and pelvic endometriosis: how deep is our understanding? Ultrasound Obstet Gynecol. 2009;33:497–501.\nScardapane A, Lorusso F, Bettocchi S, Moschetta M, Fiume M, Vimercati A, et al. Deep pelvic endometriosis: accuracy of pelvic MRI completed by MR colonography. Radiol Med. 2013;118:323–38.\nLandi S, Barbieri F, Fiaccavento A, Mainardi P, Ruffo G, Selvaggi L, et al. Preoperative double-contrast barium enema in patients with suspected intestinal endometriosis. J Am Assoc Gynecol Laparosc. 2004;11:223–8.\nSavelli L, Manuzzi L, Coe M, Mabrouk M, Di Donato N, Venturoli S, et al. Comparison of transvaginal sonography and double-contrast barium enema for diagnosing deep infiltrating endometriosis of the posterior compartment. Ultrasound Obstet Gynecol. 2011;38:466–71.\nGhezzi F, Cromi A, Bergamini V, Bolis P. Management of ureteral endometriosis: areas of controversy. Curr Opin Obstet Gynecol. 2007;19:319–24.\nBalleyguier C, Roupret M, Nguyen T, Kinkel K, Helenon O, Chapron C. Ureteral endometriosis: the role of magnetic resonance imaging. J Am Assoc Gynecol Laparosc. 2004;11:530–6.\nMaccagnano C, Pellucchi F, Rocchini L, Ghezzi M, Scattoni V, Montorsi F, et al. Ureteral endometriosis: proposal for a diagnostic and therapeutic algorithm with a review of the literature. Urol Int. 2013;91:1–9.\nBiscaldi E, Ferrero S, Fulcheri E, Ragni N, Remorgida V, Rollandi GA. Multislice CT enteroclysis in the diagnosis of bowel endometriosis. Eur Radiol. 2007;17:211–9.\nJung SI, Kim YJ, Jeon HJ, Jeong KA. Deep infiltrating endometriosis: CT imaging evaluation. J Comput Assist Tomogr. 2010;34:338–42.\nBiscaldi E, Ferrero S, Remorgida V, Rollandi GA. MDCT enteroclysis urography with split-bolus technique provides information on ureteral involvement in patients with suspected bowel endometriosis. Am J Roentgenol. 2011;196:635–40.\nFerrero S, Biscaldi E, Morotti M, Venturini PL, Remorgida V, Rollandi GA, 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;37:603–13.\nStabile Ianora AA, Moschetta M, Lorusso F, Lattarulo S, Telegrafo M, Rella L, et al. Rectosigmoid endometriosis: comparison between CT water enema and video laparoscopy. Clin Radiol. 2013;68:895–901.\nIosca S, Lumia D, Bracchi E, Duka E, De Bon M, Lekaj M, et al. Multislice computed tomography with colon water distension (MSCT-c) in the study of intestinal and ureteral endometriosis. Clin Imaging. 2013;37:1061–8.\nDeak PD, Smal Y, Kalender WA. Multisection CT protocols: sex- and age-specific conversion factors used to determine effective dose from dose-length product. Radiology. 2010;257:158–66.\nMabrouk M, Spagnolo E, Raimondo D, D’Errico A, Caprara G, Malvi D, et al. Segmental bowel resection for colorectal endometriosis: is there a correlation between histological pattern and clinical outcomes? Hum Reprod. 2012;27:1314–9.\nSeracchioli R, Mabrouk M, Montanari G, Manuzzi L, Concetti S, Venturoli S. Conservative laparoscopic management of urinary tract endometriosis (UTE): surgical outcome and long-term follow-up. Fertil Steril. 2010;94:856–61.\nDeeks JJ, Altman DG. Diagnostic tests 4: likelihood ratios. BMJ. 2004;329:168–9.\nRuiz-Cruces R, Ruiz F, Perez-Martinez M, Lopez J, Tort Ausina I, de los Rios AD. Patient dose from barium procedures. Br J Radiol. 2000;73:752–61.\nPateman 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;41:696–701.\nDonnez J, Nisolle M, Squifflet J. Ureteral endometriosis: a complication of rectovaginal endometriotic (adenomyotic) nodules. Fertil Steril. 2002;77:32–7.\nTesta AC, Van Holsbeke C, Mascilini F, Timmerman D. Dynamic and interactive gynecological ultrasound examination. Ultrasound Obstet Gynecol. 2009;34:225–9.\nAuthor information\nAuthors and Affiliations\nCorresponding author\nEthics declarations\nConflict of interest\nThe authors declare that they have no conflict of interest.\nAbout this article\nCite this article\nZannoni, L., Del Forno, S., Coppola, F. et al. Comparison of transvaginal sonography and computed tomography–colonography with contrast media and urographic phase for diagnosing deep infiltrating endometriosis of the posterior compartment of the pelvis: a pilot study. Jpn J Radiol 35, 546–554 (2017). https://doi.org/10.1007/s11604-017-0665-4\nReceived:\nAccepted:\nPublished:\nIssue date:\nDOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s11604-017-0665-4","source_license":"public-domain-us","license_restricted":false}