Technical Accuracy and Efficiency of Magnetic Resonance Imaging in Evaluation of Uterine Masses in Comparison with Ultrasound

Hind Moafak Abd-Aljabbar, Haider Qasim Hamood, Hussein Hasan Nsaif
In: Indian Journal of Forensic Medicine & Toxicology · 2021 · vol. 15(3) , pp. 2406–2415 · doi:10.37506/ijfmt.v15i3.15672 · W3170934895
article OA: hybrid CC0
🔓 Open OA copy Full text JSON View on OpenAlex View at publisher
⚙ AI-generated summary by claude@2026-07, 2026-07-09 ⓘ

This study compared ultrasound and MRI in 41 patients, finding MRI superior in accuracy and sensitivity for characterizing uterine masses like leiomyomas and adenomyosis, and for detecting endometrial carcinoma.

One-sentence paraphrase of the abstract; not a substitute for reading it. No clinical advice. How this works

⚙ AI-generated deep summary by claude@2026-07, 2026-07-09 · read from full text ⓘ

This prospective study compared the technical accuracy and efficiency of ultrasound and MRI for detecting and characterizing uterine masses in 41 female patients with suspected uterine pathology, estimating sensitivity, specificity, accuracy, and predictive values for different lesion types. Most patients were diagnosed with leiomyoma (68%) and adenomyosis (17%), with 7% malignant diagnoses overall; for myometrial (leiomyoma) detection, both modalities showed 100% sensitivity, but MRI achieved higher accuracy (100% vs 92%) while ultrasound had much lower sensitivity for determining the leiomyoma site. The paper reports better adenomyosis characterization with MRI (adenomyosis sensitivity 100% vs 71% for ultrasound, and accuracy 100% vs 75%), and for endometrial carcinoma MRI had 100% sensitivity with specificity of 50% whereas ultrasound had zero sensitivity with specificity 50%; a key limitation is the small sample size across multiple rare categories. This paper is centrally about endometriosis and/or adenomyosis — it directly evaluates adenomyosis imaging accuracy and contrasts MRI versus ultrasound.

Read from the paper's body, not the abstract. Not a substitute for reading the paper. No clinical advice. How this works

Abstract

Aim of the Study: comparing accuracy, sensitivity and specificity of the magnetic resonance imaging and ultrasound in differentiating and characterizing of uterine masses.Patients and Method: A prospectively studied has been conducted on 41 female patients with suspected uterine masses. They were subjected to ultrasound and magnetic resonance imaging (MRI) examination. Comparison has been performed between modalities to detect and characterize all masses. Statistical parameters that include the specificity, sensitivity, accuracy and positive and negative predictive value have been estimated for the two modalities in all of the uterine masses.Results: Among 41 female patients, majority were diagnosed as leiomyoma 28 (68%), cervical cancer 1 (2%), adenomyosis 7 (17%), endometrial polyp 2 (5%), endometrial carcinoma 2 (5%) and normal 1 patient (2%). Totally 3 (i.e. 7%) patients have been found malignant while 37 (i.e. 93%) have been found benign. For detection of myometrial mass (leiomyoma), the sensitivity between the ultrasound and MRI is 100%, accuracy was (ultrasound: 92% and MRI: 100%). In the classification of myometrial mass (i.e. leiomyoma) site, sensitivity between the ultrasound and MRI has been 21% and 92% respectively and specificity was (ultrasound: 0 and MRI: 100%). All intramural and subserosal lesions are seen in MRI. For picking up degeneration within the leiomyoma MRI are more useful. There have been considerable differences in the diagnosis of the adenomyosis by the MRI in comparison with ultrasound with sensitivity was (MRI: 100% and ultrasound: 71%), and specificity for both was 100%, whereas accuracy was 75% for ultrasound and 100% for MRI. In the detection of the endometrial carcinoma, the MRI has achieved 100% sensitivity and 50% specificity whereas ultrasound had zero sensitivity and specificity was 50%. Among two cases of endometrial polyp, one patient is diagnosed correctly by ultrasound & MRI, the sensitivity for both was 50% and accuracy was (ultrasound: 50% and MRI: 75%). MRI and ultrasound was correctly diagnosis of one patient with cervical cancer with sensitivity and accuracy 100%.
Full text 2,510 characters · extracted from oa-doi-fallback · click to expand
Technical Accuracy and Efficiency of Magnetic Resonance Imaging in Evaluation of Uterine Masses in Comparison with Ultrasound DOI: https://doi.org/10.37506/ijfmt.v15i3.15672Keywords: Uterine masses, USG, MRI, leiomyoma, adenomyosis, endometrial carcinomaAbstract Aim of the Study: comparing accuracy, sensitivity and specificity of the magnetic resonance imaging and ultrasound in differentiating and characterizing of uterine masses. Patients and Method: A prospectively studied has been conducted on 41 female patients with suspected uterine masses. They were subjected to ultrasound and magnetic resonance imaging (MRI) examination. Comparison has been performed between modalities to detect and characterize all masses. Statistical parameters that include the specificity, sensitivity, accuracy and positive and negative predictive value have been estimated for the two modalities in all of the uterine masses. Results: Among 41 female patients, majority were diagnosed as leiomyoma 28 (68%), cervical cancer 1 (2%), adenomyosis 7 (17%), endometrial polyp 2 (5%), endometrial carcinoma 2 (5%) and normal 1 patient (2%). Totally 3 (i.e. 7%) patients have been found malignant while 37 (i.e. 93%) have been found benign. For detection of myometrial mass (leiomyoma), the sensitivity between the ultrasound and MRI is 100%, accuracy was (ultrasound: 92% and MRI: 100%). In the classification of myometrial mass (i.e. leiomyoma) site, sensitivity between the ultrasound and MRI has been 21% and 92% respectively and specificity was (ultrasound: 0 and MRI: 100%). All intramural and subserosal lesions are seen in MRI. For picking up degeneration within the leiomyoma MRI are more useful. There have been considerable differences in the diagnosis of the adenomyosis by the MRI in comparison with ultrasound with sensitivity was (MRI: 100% and ultrasound: 71%), and specificity for both was 100%, whereas accuracy was 75% for ultrasound and 100% for MRI. In the detection of the endometrial carcinoma, the MRI has achieved 100% sensitivity and 50% specificity whereas ultrasound had zero sensitivity and specificity was 50%. Among two cases of endometrial polyp, one patient is diagnosed correctly by ultrasound & MRI, the sensitivity for both was 50% and accuracy was (ultrasound: 50% and MRI: 75%). MRI and ultrasound was correctly diagnosis of one patient with cervical cancer with sensitivity and accuracy 100%. Downloads Published Issue Section License https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc/2.0/deed.en

Text is read by the "Ask this paper" AI Q&A widget below. Extraction quality varies by source — PMC NXML preserves structure cleanly, OA-HTML may include some navigation residue, and OA-PDF can have broken hyphenation. The publisher copy (via DOI) is the canonical version.

My notes (saved in your browser only)

⚙ Ask this paper AI returns verbatim quotes from the full text · source: oa-doi-fallback ⓘ

Answers must be backed by verbatim quotes from this paper's full text. Hallucinated quotes are dropped automatically; if no verbatim passage answers the question, we say so. How this works

Condition tags

adenomyosis

Citation neighborhood (sparse)

Too few in-corpus citations on either side for a chart; here are the lists.

Cites (3)

References (19)

Source provenance

openalex
last seen: 2026-06-10T17:14:06.276822+00:00
License: CC0 · commercial use OK