Assessment of the Effectiveness of the Vaginal Contrast Media in Magnetic Resonance Imaging for Detection of Pelvic Pathologies: A Meta-analysis
review
OA: closed
CC0
⤵ 3 in-corpus citations
Abstract
OBJECTIVE: Magnetic resonance imaging (MRI) is an excellent modality for pelvic imaging. The anatomy of uterine cavity and vagina is optimally evaluated when the walls, which may spontaneously be collapsed, are distended. Distension of these cavities during pelvic MRI for evaluation of gynecologic diseases has been conducted with vagina, filled with ultrasound gel or saline solution. In this meta-analysis, we aim to assess the effectiveness of vaginal contrast media in MRI for improving the detection of pelvic pathologies. METHODS: The PubMed, MEDLINE, EMBASE, Web of Science, Google Scholar, Science Citation Index, and Cochrane Library databases were systematically searched through March 2019 for studies of the accuracy of MRI using vaginal contrast media in the diagnosis and staging of pelvic pathologies. Four eligible studies of a total of 120 patients were included in the meta-analysis. The sensitivity rates and relative risk for MRI, before and after vaginal contrast medium administration, were pooled, and their 95% confidence intervals (CIs) were determined. RESULTS: The pooled sensitivity rate for MRI before administering intravaginal contrast medium in detecting pelvic pathologies was 63% (95% CI, 54%-72%), and that after was 89% (95% CI, 83%-93%). The interstudy heterogeneity rate (assessed using the I statistic) was relatively low: 13% (P = 0.33) and 0% (P = 0.45) before and after vaginal contrast medium use, respectively. The average relative risk was 1.54 (SD, 0.22; 95% CI, 1.18-1.89; median, 1.50; range, 1.34-1.80). This demonstrated that, on average, the sensitivity rate for MRI in detecting pelvic disorders increased by 54% after the use of a vaginal contrast medium. CONCLUSIONS: Use of vaginal contrast media improved the diagnostic ability of MRI in identifying pelvic pathologies.
My notes (saved in your browser only)
Condition tags
MeSH descriptors
Citation neighborhood
Papers in the corpus that this work cites (lower rings, blue) and that cite this one (upper rings, green). Dot size scales with the paper's in-corpus citation count — bigger dot = more influential within the endo/adeno field. Click a dot to open that paper. [ expand to 2 hops ] — adds papers reached through this work's immediate citers/citees. Heavier; up to 60 extra dots.
References (39)
- Deep infiltrating endometriosis: Should rectal and vaginal opacification be systematically used in MR imaging? via openalex
- Deeply infiltrating endometriosis: Evaluation of retro-cervical space on MRI after vaginal opacification via openalex
- Deep pelvic endometriosis: Limited additional diagnostic value of postcontrast in comparison with conventional MR images via openalex
- Endometriosis: Contribution of 3.0-T Pelvic MR Imaging in Preoperative Assessment—Initial Results via openalex
- European society of urogenital radiology (ESUR) guidelines: MR imaging of pelvic endometriosis via openalex
- Evaluation of the Usefulness of the MRI Jelly Method for Diagnosing Complete Cul-de-Sac Obliteration via openalex
- Intravaginal Gel for Staging of Female Pelvic Cancers—Preliminary Report of Safety, Distention, and Gel-Mucosal Contrast During Magnetic Resonance Examination via openalex
- Utility of vaginal and rectal contrast medium in MRI for the detection of deep pelvic endometriosis via openalex
- W2991792334 via openalex
- W6674159384 via openalex
- W6678848921 via openalex
- W6681971782 via openalex
- W6757852938 via openalex
- W6863861441 via openalex
- doi:10.2214/ajr.128.6.1064 via openalex
- doi:10.2214/ajr.06.1196 via openalex
- doi:10.1136/bmj.327.7414.557 via openalex
- doi:10.1016/j.fertnstert.2004.01.016 via openalex
- doi:10.3348/kjr.2018.19.3.397 via openalex
- doi:10.7326/0003-4819-151-4-200908180-00135 via openalex
- doi:10.7326/0003-4819-155-8-201110180-00009 via openalex
- doi:10.1002/9781119756194 via openalex
- doi:10.1148/radiographics.20.6.g00nv111539 via openalex
- doi:10.1007/s00330-005-2645-9 via openalex
- doi:10.1007/s00330-010-1998-x via openalex
- doi:10.1007/s00261-004-0298-9 via openalex
- doi:10.1016/j.clinimag.2016.07.004 via openalex
- doi:10.1016/j.contraception.2008.11.001 via openalex
- doi:10.1097/rct.0b013e3181ed3090 via openalex
- doi:10.1097/01.coc.0000037764.72722.07 via openalex
- doi:10.1136/bmj.b2535 via openalex
- doi:10.1007/s00330-016-4471-7 via openalex
- doi:10.2214/ajr.04.1660 via openalex
- doi:10.47102/annals-acadmedsg.v32n4p550 via openalex
- W81095260 via openalex
- doi:10.1148/radiology.213.2.r99oc23608 via openalex
- doi:10.1002/ijgo.12749 via openalex
- doi:10.1177/1740774506075667 via openalex
- W2397440520 via openalex
Cited by (3)
Source provenance
- europepmc
- last seen: 2026-06-04T01:30:01.192114+00:00
- openalex
- last seen: 2026-05-10T10:39:02.312044+00:00
- pubmed
- last seen: 2026-05-13T22:22:05.164793+00:00
License: CC0
· commercial use OK