{"paper_id":"caa3f7db-51ec-464c-9f26-a4cc01316caa","body_text":"Abstract\nPurpose: Our objective was to evaluate the differences between leiomyoma and adenomyosis by color Doppler sonography with new criteria.\nMethods: A total of 78 patients with symptomatic uterine nodularities who were sonographically suspected to have leiomyoma or adenomyosis without other coexisting pathologic conditions was enrolled in the study. All patients underwent transvaginal color Doppler sonography (7.0-MHz vaginal probe) or transabdominal color Doppler sonography (5.0 MHz) during the early follicular phase. The morphology, tumor vascular pattern, and blood flow impedance of the uterine tumors were measured. All of the patients underwent surgery and the pathologic reports were used as references.\nResults: The mean age was not statistically significant in patients with adenomyosis versus leiomyoma (P > 0.05). The morphologic criteria for adenomyosis and leiomyoma by sonography detected 79% of adenomyosis and 84% of leiomyoma. Adenomyosis had 87% randomly scattered vessels or intratumoral signals and 88% of leiomyomas showed peripheral scattered vessels or outer feeding vessels. Eighty-two percent of adenomyoses had a pulsitility index (PI) of arteries within or around uterine tumors >1.17 and 84% of leiomyomas had a PI ≤ 1.17. The reliability test of tumor vascular pattern and blood flow impedance were better than that of using morphological criteria alone.\nConclusions: With the aid of color Doppler sonography, tumor vascular pattern and blood flow impedance of the arteries within or around uterine tumors could more accurately diagnose adenomyosis and leiomyoma in addition to the morphologic criteria on transvaginal sonography.\nSimilar content being viewed by others\nREFERENCES\nArnold LL, Acher SM, Schruefer JJ, Simon JA: The nonsurgical diagnosis of adenomyosis. Obstet Gynecol 1995;86:461–465\nFedele L, Areaini L, Bianchi S, Zanotti F, Dorta M, Carinelli S: Transvaginal ultrasonography in the diagnosis of diffuse adenomyosis. Fertil Steril 1992;58:94–97\nFedele L, Bianchi S, Dorta M, Zanotti F, Brioschi D, Carinelli S: Transvaginal ultrasonography in the differential diagnosis of adenomyosis versus leiomyoma. Am J Obstet Gynecol 1992;167:603–606\nAscher SM, Arnold LL, Patt RH, Schruefer JJ, Bagley AS, Semelka RCR, Zeman RK, Simon JA: Adenomyosis: Prospective comparison of MR imaging and transvaginal sonography. Radiology 1994;190:803–806\nReinhold C, McCarthy S, Bret PM, Mehio A, Atri M, Zakaian R, Glaude Y, Liang L, Seymour R: Diffuse adenomyosis: comparison of endovaginal US and MR imaging with histopathologic correlation. Radiology 1996;199:151–158\nHirai M, Shibata K, Sagai H, Sekiya S, Goldberg BB: Transvaginal pulsed and color Doppler sonography for the evaluation of adenomyosis. J Ultrasound Med 1995;14:529–532\nSosic A, Skupski DW, Streltzoff J, Yun H, Chervenak FA: Vascularity of uterine myomas: Assessment by color and pulsed Doppler ultrasound. Int J Gynecol Obstet 1996;54:245–250\nHuang SC, Yu CH, Huang RT, Hsu KF, Tsai YC, Chou CY: Intratumoral blood flow in uterine myoma correlated with a lower tumor size and volume, but not correlated with cell proliferation or angiogenesis. Obstet Gynecol 1996;87:1019–1024\nStempel LE: Eenie, meenie, minie, mo... What do the data really show? Am J Obstet Gynecol 1982;144:745–752\nDeCherney AH: The effect of leiomyomata on fertility. Obstet Gynecol Forum 1990;4:3–5\nVerkauf BS: Myomectomy for fertility enhancement and preservation. Fertil Steril 1992;58:1–15\nMuse KN: Cyclic pelvic pain. Obstet Gynecol Clin North Am 1990;17:427–440\nAzziz R: Adenomyosis: current perspectives. Obstet Gynecol Clin North Am 1989;16:221–223\nGoldberger MA, Marshak RH, Hermel M: Roentgen findings in adenomyosis. Am J Obstet Gynecol 1955;64:846–851\nWolf DM, Spataro RF: The current state of hysterosalpingography. Radiographics 1988;8:1041–1058\nWalsh JW, Taylor KJ, Rosenfield AT: Gray scale ultrasonography in the diagnosis of endometriosis and adenomyosis. Am J Roentgenol 1979;132:87–90\nReinhold C, Atri M, Mehio A, Zakarian R, Aldis AE, Bret PM: Diffuse uterine adenomyosis: Morphologic criteria and diagnostic accuracy of endovaginal sonography. Radiology 1995;197:609–614\nBotsis D, Kassanos D, Antoniou G, Pyrgiotis E, Karakitsos P, Kalogirou D: Adenomyoma and leiomyoma: Differential diagnosis with transvaginal sonography. J Clin Ultrasound 1998;26:21–25\nKessler A, Mitchell DG, Kuhlman K, Goldberg BB: Myoma vs. contraction in pregnancy: Differentiation with color Doppler imaging. J Clin Ultrasound 1993;21:241–244\nSladkevicius P, Valentin L, Marsal K: Transvaginal Doppler examination for the differential diagnosis of solid pelvic tumors. J Ultrasound Med 1995;14:377–380\nAlatas G, Aksoy E. Akarsu C, Yakin K, Bahceci M: The effect of uterine volume on uterine artery Doppler velocimetry in the myomatous state. Gynecol Obstet Invest 1997;43:55–59\nKurjak A, Kupesic-Urek S, Miric D: The assessment of benign uterine tumor vascularization by transvaginal color Doppler. Ultrasound Med Biol 1992;18:645–649\nSladkevicius P, Valentin L, Marsal K: Transvaginal Doppler examination of uteri with myomas. J Clin Ultrasound 1996;24:135–140\nAuthor information\nAuthors and Affiliations\nRights and permissions\nAbout this article\nCite this article\nChiang, CH., Chang, MY., Hsu, JJ. et al. Tumor Vascular Pattern and Blood Flow Impedance in the Differential Diagnosis of Leiomyoma and Adenomyosis by Color Doppler Sonography. J Assist Reprod Genet 16, 268–275 (1999). https://doi.org/10.1023/A:1020371614069\nIssue date:\nDOI: https://doi.org/10.1023/A:1020371614069","source_license":"CC0","license_restricted":false}