{"paper_id":"dd932e4a-c8b7-4916-a3b2-ad92d00d16da","body_text":"Abstract\nObjective\nTo verify whether the capability of magnetic resonance imaging (MRI) in diagnosing deep infiltrating colorectal endometriosis (DICE) is improved using an association of MRI findings.\nMethods and materials\nThe imaging database of our Institute of Radiology was retrospectively reviewed to identify patients subjected to MRI for a suspicion of deep infiltrating endometriosis. Medical history was then investigated and only patients who were also subjected to laparoscopy (LA) were included. Absence of LA represented the exclusion criterion. Images were evaluated twice by two radiologists using two different diagnostic criteria for an abnormal result: the contemporary presence of nodules or hypointense plaque-like lesions in the adjacent fat plane and bowel wall thickness, without (first criterion) or with (second criterion) semicircular shape (i.e. “radial and retracting shape”). Radiologists worked in consensus evaluating images in two separate sessions, using the first criterion in the first section and the second criterion in the second one. MRI results were compared with LA or histopathology as the gold standard by 2 × 2 tables and statistically analyzed (k statistics). Likelihood-ratio test was also performed, being independent from the prevalence of the disease.\nResults\nBy consulting case sheets, 33/50 females (ranging age 24–39 years, mean age 32.2 years) who were subjected to MRI also underwent LA. Intestinal resection for DICE was performed in 11/33 patients; in 22/33 superficial intestinal foci, adhesions/nodules in the fat plane were simply removed. When the first criterion was applied, MRI agreement with histopathology or LA was poor (51.5 %) (k value = 0.20; p < 0.055), while it was improved (96.9 %) when using the second diagnostic criterion (k value = 0.93; p < 0.0000). Likelihood ratio was 1.375 (95 % CI 0.69–2.72) using the first and 22 (95 % CI 20.08–24.1) using the second criterion.\nConclusion\nThe second criterion, or the joint presence of nodules or hypointense plaque-like lesions in the adjacent fat plane and bowel wall thickness showing “radial and retracting shape”, improves MRI capability in DICE diagnosis. It can be considered an effective indicator of DICE on T2-weighted images at 1.5-T MRI, and can ensure the correct preoperative assessment of the disease for the best therapeutic procedure and treatment planning.\nSimilar content being viewed by others\nReferences\nRemorgida V, Ferrero S, Fulcheri E et al (2007) Bowel endometriosis: presentation, diagnosis, and treatment. Obstet Gynecol Surv 62:461–470\nYoon JH, Choi D, Jang K-T et al (2010) Deep recto sigmoid endometriosis: \"mushroom cap\" sign on T2-weighted MR imaging. Abdom Imaging 35:726–731\nBergamini V, Ghezzi F, Scarperi S et al (2010) Preoperative assessment of intestinal endometriosis: a comparison of transvaginal sonography with water-contrast in the rectum, transrectal sonography, and barium enema. Abdom Imaging 35:732–736\nScardapane A, Bettocchi S, Lorusso F et al (2011) Diagnosis of colorectal endometriosis: contribution of contrast enhanced MR colonography. Eur Radiol 21:1553–1563\nValentini AL, Gui B, Basilico R et al (2012) Magnetic resonance imaging in women with pelvic pain from gynecological causes: a pictorial review. Radiol Med 117:575–592\nBazot M, Daral E, Hourany N et al (2004) Deep pelvic endometriosis: MR imaging for diagnosis and prediction of extension of disease. Radiology 232:379–389\nFaccioli N, Foti G, Manfredi R et al (2010) Evaluation of colonic involvement in endometriosis: double-contrast barium enema vs. magnetic resonance imaging. Abdom Imaging 35:414–421\nBazot M, Gasnera A, Lafonta C et al (2011) Deep pelvic endometriosis: limited additional diagnostic value of post-contrast in comparison with conventional MR images. Eur J Radiol 80:331–339\nLandi S, Barbieri F, Fiaccavento A et al (2004) Preoperative double-contrast barium enema in patients with suspected intestinal endometriosis. J Am Assoc Gynecol Laparosc 11:223–228\nMarchal L, Nothft MA, Coelho F, Choi K (2010) Deep pelvic endometriosis: MR imaging. Abdom Imaging 35:708–715\nBusard MP, Van der Houwen LEE, Bleeker Maaike C et al (2012) Deep infiltrating endometriosis of the bowel: MR imaging as a method to predict muscular invasion. Abdom Imaging 37:549–557\nKoga K, Osuga Y, Yano T et al (2003) Characteristic images of deeply infiltrating rectosigmoid endometriosis on transvaginal and transrectal ultrasonography. Hum Reprod 18:1328–1333\nHottat N, Larrousse C, Anaf V et al (2009) Endometriosis: contribution of 3.0-T pelvic MR imaging in preoperative assessment—initial results. Radiology 253:126–134\nLoubeyre P, Petignat P, Jacob S et al (2009) Anatomic distribution of posterior deeply infiltrating endometriosis on MRI after vaginal and rectal gel opacification. AJR 192:1625–1631\nConflict of interest\nAnna Lia Valentini, Benedetta Gui, Maura Miccò, Maria Carla Mingote, Valeria Ninivaggi, Maurizio Guido, Gian Franco Zannoni, Eleonora Marrucci and Lorenzo Bonomo declare no conflict of interest.\nAuthor information\nAuthors and Affiliations\nCorresponding author\nRights and permissions\nAbout this article\nCite this article\nValentini, A.L., Gui, B., Miccò, M. et al. How to improve MRI accuracy in detecting deep infiltrating colorectal endometriosis: MRI findings vs. laparoscopy and histopathology. Radiol med 119, 291–297 (2014). https://doi.org/10.1007/s11547-013-0336-1\nReceived:\nAccepted:\nPublished:\nIssue date:\nDOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s11547-013-0336-1","source_license":"CC0","license_restricted":false}