{"paper_id":"f1749475-aa38-42ca-bb63-43347b32bbde","body_text":"Ultrasound & Elastography in the Diagnosis of Endometriosis & Adenomyosis-Comparing the Diagnostic Accuracy of Transvaginal Ultrasound with Elastography Vs. Mri in Deep Infiltrating Endometriosis and Adenomyosis\nArticle Sidebar\nMain Article Content\nAbstract: Deep infiltrating endometriosis (DIE) and adenomyosis are common causes of pelvic pain and infertility. Accurate preoperative diagnosis is critical for management. Transvaginal ultrasound (TVUS), increasingly augmented with elastography, and magnetic resonance imaging (MRI) are the leading noninvasive modalities.\nDownloads\nReferences\nChapron C, Marcellin L, Borghese B, Santulli P. Rethinking mechanisms, diagnosis and management of endometriosis. Nat Rev Endocrinol. 2019;15(11):666-82.\nGuerriero S, Pascual MA, Ajossa S, et al. Deep infiltrating endometriosis: comparison between 2D/3D transvaginal ultrasound and MRI. Diagn Interv Imaging. 2025;106(2):194-201.\nHudelist G, Fritzer N, Thomas A, et al. Diagnostic accuracy of transvaginal sonography for non-invasive diagnosis of bowel endometriosis: systematic review and meta-analysis. Ultrasound Obstet Gynecol. 2020;55(4):393-401.\nZondervan KT, Becker CM, Missmer SA. Endometriosis. N Engl J Med. 2020;382(13):1244-56.\nBazot M, Daraï E. Diagnosis of deep endometriosis: clinical examination, ultrasonography, magnetic resonance imaging, and other imaging techniques. Fertil Steril. 2020;113(4):886-94.\nVan den Bosch T, Dueholm M, Leone FP, et al. Terms, definitions and measurements to describe sonographic features of myometrium and uterine masses: a consensus opinion from the Morphological Uterus Sonographic Assessment (MUSA) group. Ultrasound Obstet Gynecol. 2015;46(3):284-98.\nGrasso RF, Di Grezia G, Sizzi O, et al. Diagnosis of adenomyosis: transvaginal sonography combined with elastography versus magnetic resonance imaging. Ultrasound Obstet Gynecol. 2023;61(2):140-8.\nLeonardi M, Espada M, Khoo SK, et al. Imaging diagnosis of rectosigmoid endometriosis: systematic review and meta-analysis. Ultrasound Obstet Gynecol. 2023;61(2):1447-53.\nTakeuchi H, Kuwatsuru R, Kitade M, et al. A feasibility study of transvaginal strain elastography for diagnosing deep endometriosis. J Ultrasound Med. 2024;43(2):332-40.\nKinkel K, Frei KA, Balleyguier C, Chapron C. Diagnosis of endometriosis with imaging: a review. Eur Radiol. 2020;30(2):580-93.\nStoelinga B, Hehenkamp WJ, Brölmann HA, Huirne JA. Real-time elastography for the evaluation of adenomyosis: a prospective pilot study. Ultrasound Obstet Gynecol. 2023;61(4):554-62.\nBazot M, Daraï E. Role of transvaginal sonography and magnetic resonance imaging in the diagnosis of uterine adenomyosis. Fertil Steril. 2020;113(4):606-16.\nShaikh S, Hassan L, Tareen F, Tauseef H. Comparative evaluation of transvaginal ultrasound and MRI in the diagnosis of adenomyosis. J Obstet Gynaecol Res. 2023;49(1):316-24.\nSharma P, Sharma R, Aggarwal A, et al. Comparative evaluation of 2D TVUS and MRI in the diagnosis of adenomyosis and fibroids: A systematic review. Eur J Radiol. 2023;156:110576.\nGordts S, Brosens JJ, Fusi L, Benagiano G, Brosens I. Uterine adenomyosis: a need for uniform terminology and consensus classification. Reprod Biomed Online. 2022;44(4):598-607.\nBazot M, Daraï E. Role of MRI in the diagnosis of deep infiltrating endometriosis and adenomyosis. Best Pract Res Clin Obstet Gynaecol. 2020;71:90-102.\nThis work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License.\nAll articles published in our journal are licensed under CC-BY 4.0, which permits authors to retain copyright of their work. This license allows for unrestricted use, sharing, and reproduction of the articles, provided that proper credit is given to the original authors and the source.","source_license":"CC0","license_restricted":false}