{"paper_id":"e63b862a-85f6-4dd1-83be-361b4a685618","body_text":"Abstract\nBenign uterine conditions of myometrial or endometrial origin are frequent and an accurate diagnosis is mandatory in order to provide the patient the best treatment alternatives. Although transvaginal ultrasound (TVS) remains the primary imaging modality in their assessment, magnetic resonance imaging (MRI) has an added value, acting as a problem-solving tool in several conditions, as well as being a reproducible imaging modality for follow-up when conservative therapy is chosen. The following conditions will be discussed specifically: adenomyosis, leiomyomas, endometrial hyperplasia, and polyps.\nAccess this chapter\nTax calculation will be finalised at checkout\nPurchases are for personal use only\nSimilar content being viewed by others\nReferences\nAscher SM, Arnold LL, Patt RH, Schruefer JJ, Bagley AS, Semelka RC, Zeman RK, Simon JA. Adenomyosis: prospective comparison of MR imaging and transvaginal sonography. Radiology. 1994;190(3):803–6.\nAscher SM, Imaoka I, Lage JM. Tamoxifen-induced uterine abnormalities: the role of imaging. Radiology. 2000;214:29–38.\nAscher SM, Jha RC, Reinhold C. Benign myometrial conditions: leiomyomas and adenomyosis. Top Magn Reson Imaging. 2003;14(4):281–304.\nAzziz R. Adenomyosis: current perspectives. Obstet Gynecol Clin North Am. 1989;16:221–35.\nBazot M, Cortez A, Emile D, et al. Ultrasonography compared with magnetic resonance imaging for the diagnosis of adenomyosis: correlation with histopathology. Hum Reprod. 2001;16:2427–33.\nChampaneria R, Abedin P, Daniels J, Balogun M, Khan KS. Ultrasound scan and magnetic resonance imaging for the diagnosis of adenomyosis: systematic review comparing test accuracy. Acta Obstet Gynecol Scand. 2010;89(11):1374–84.\nDueholm M, Lundorf E, Hansen ES, Ledertoug S, Olesen F. Accuracy of magnetic resonance imaging and transvaginal ultrasonography in the diagnosis, mapping, and measurement of uterine myomas. Am J Obstet Gynecol. 2002;186(3):409–15.\nExacoustos C, Brienza L, Di Giovanni A, Szabolcs B, Romanini ME, Zupi E, Arduini D. Adenomyosis: three-dimensional sonographic findings of the junctional zone and correlation with histology. Ultrasound Obstet Gynecol. 2011;37(4):471–9.\nGrasel RP, Outwater EK, Siegelman ES, Capuzzi D, Parker L, Hussain SM. Endometrial polyps: MR imaging features and distinction from endometrial carcinoma. Radiology. 2000;214(1):47–52.\nGriffin Y, Sudigali V, Jacques A. Radiology of benign disorders of menstruation. Semin Ultrasound CT MR. 2010;31(5):414–32.\nKurman RJ, Norris HJ. Endometrial hyperplasia and related cellular changes. In: Kurman RJ, editor. Blaustein’s pathology of the female genital tract. 4th ed. Berlin/Heidelberg/New York: Springer; 1994. p. 411–37.\nOzdegirmenci O, Kayikcioglu F, Akgul MA, Kaplan M, Karcaaltincaba M, Haberal A, Akyol M. Comparison of levonorgestrel intrauterine system versus hysterectomy on efficacy and quality of life in patients with adenomyosis. Fertil Steril. 2011;95(2):497–502.\nPopovic M, Puchner S, Berzaczy D, Lammer J, Bucek RA. Uterine artery embolization for the treatment of adenomyosis: a review. J Vasc Interv Radiol. 2011;22(7):901–9.\nRajan DK, Margau R, Kroll RR, Simons ME, Tan KT, Jaskolka JD, Kachura JR, Sniderman KW, Beecroft JR, Haider M. Clinical utility of ultrasound versus magnetic resonance imaging for deciding to proceed with uterine artery magnetic resonance imaging for deciding to proceed with uterine artery embolization for presumed symptomatic fibroids. Clin Radiol. 2011;66(1):57–62.\nReinhold C, Khalili I. Postmenopausal bleeding: value of imaging. Radiol Clin North Am. 2002;40(3):527–62.\nReinhold C, McCarthy S, Bret PM, et al. Diffuse adenomyosis: comparison of endovaginal US and MR imaging with histopathologic correlation. Radiology. 1996;199:151–8.\nReinhold C, Tafazoli F, Mehio A, et al. Uterine adenomyosis: endovaginal US and MR imaging features with histopathologic correlation. Radiographics. 1999;19:S147–60.\nShen SH, Fennessy F, McDannold N, Jolesz F, Tempany C. Image-guided thermal therapy of uterine fibroids. Semin Ultrasound CT MR. 2009;30(2):91–104.\nSmith-Bindman R, Kerlikowske K, Feldstein VA, Subak L, Scheidler J, Segal M, Brand R, Grady D. Endovaginal ultrasound to exclude endometrial cancer and other endometrial abnormalities. JAMA. 1998;280(17):1510–17.\nSpies JB, Cooper JM, Worthington-Kirsch R, et al. Outcome of uterine embolization and hysterectomy for leiomyomas: results of a multicenter study. Am J Obstet Gynecol. 2004;191:22–31.\nTakamizawa S, Minakami H, Usui R, et al. Risk of complications and uterine malignancies in women undergoing hysterectomy for presumed benign leiomyomas. Gynecol Obstet Invest. 1999;48:193–6.\nTakeuchi M, Matsuzaki K, Nishitani H. Diffusion-weighted magnetic resonance imaging of endometrial cancer: differentiation from benign endometrial lesions and preoperative assessment of myometrial invasion. Acta Radiol. 2009;50(8):947–53.\nTakeuchi M, Matsuzaki K, Nishitani H. Manifestations of the female reproductive organs on MR images: changes induced by various physiologic states. Radiographics. 2010;30(4):1147.\nTamai K, Koyama T, Saga T, et al. The utility of diffusion-weighted MR imaging for differentiating uterine sarcomas from benign leiomyomas. Eur Radiol. 2008;18:723–30.\nTanaka YO, Nishida M, Tsunoda H, et al. Smooth muscle tumors of uncertain malignant potential and leiomyosarcomas of the uterus: MR findings. J Magn Reson Imaging. 2004;20:998–1007.\nTogashi K, Ozasa H, Konishi I, et al. Enlarged uterus: differentiation between adenomyosis and leiomyoma with MR imaging. Radiology. 1989;171:531–4.\nUeda H, Togashi K, Konishi I, Kataoka ML, Koyama T, Fujiwara T, Kobayashi H, Fujii S, Konishi J. Unusual appearances of uterine leiomyomas: MR imaging findings and their histopathologic backgrounds. Radiographics. 1999;19:S131–45.\nWeeks AD, Wilkinson N, Arora DS, et al. Menopausal changes in the myometrium: an investigation using a GnRH agonist model. Int J Gynecol Pathol. 1999;18:226–32.\nWeinreb JC, Barkoff ND, Megibow A, Demopoulos R. The value of MR imaging in distinguishing leiomyomas from other solid pelvic masses when sonography is indeterminate. Am J Roentgenol. 1990;154:295–9.\nZhou M, Chen JY, Tang LD, Chen WZ, Wang ZB. Ultrasound-guided high-intensity focused ultrasound ablation for adenomyosis: the clinical experience of a single center. Fertil Steril. 2011;95(3):900–5.\nAuthor information\nAuthors and Affiliations\nCorresponding author\nEditor information\nEditors and Affiliations\nRights and permissions\nCopyright information\n© 2013 Springer-Verlag Berlin Heidelberg\nAbout this entry\nCite this entry\nNoël, P., Reinhold, C. (2013). Benign Uterine Conditions. In: Hamm, B., Ros, P.R. (eds) Abdominal Imaging. Springer, Berlin, Heidelberg. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-642-13327-5_180\nDownload citation\nDOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-642-13327-5_180\nPublisher Name: Springer, Berlin, Heidelberg\nPrint ISBN: 978-3-642-13326-8\nOnline ISBN: 978-3-642-13327-5\neBook Packages: MedicineReference Module Medicine\nKeywords\n- Endometrial Carcinoma\n- Uterine Artery Embolization\n- Endometrial Thickening\n- Endometrial Hyperplasia\n- Endometrial Polyp\nThese keywords were added by machine and not by the authors. This process is experimental and the keywords may be updated as the learning algorithm improves.","source_license":"CC0","license_restricted":false}