Diagnostic accuracy study of sonography in adenomyosis: A study of current practice

other OA: green CC-BY-NC-4.0
AI-generated summary by claude@2026-06, 2026-06-13

This study evaluated the diagnostic accuracy of pelvic sonography for adenomyosis against pathology, finding a sensitivity of 52% and specificity of 85%.

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

AI-generated deep summary by claude@2026-06, 2026-06-13 · read from full text

I’m unable to summarize the paper because the provided content does not include the study’s methods, results, or limitations—only an access-block page describing an anti-bot system. Without the actual paper text, I cannot determine what population was examined, what sonographic criteria or reference standard were used to assess diagnostic accuracy, or what findings and caveats were reported. The paper cannot be meaningfully summarized in the required format based on the content available. This paper is centrally about adenomyosis — it is explicitly titled and indexed as a diagnostic accuracy study of sonography in adenomyosis.

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

Abstract

OBJECTIVES: To estimate diagnostic accuracy of sonography in the diagnosis of adenomyosis in current practice when compared to pathology as a "gold standard". METHODS: This diagnosis accuracy study was observational and retrospective, including women managed by hysterectomy for benign pathology from January 2015 to November 2018. Preoperative pelvic sonography reports were collected, including details on diagnosis criteria for adenomyosis. Sonographic findings were compared to pathological results of the hysterectomy specimens. RESULTS: Our study initially concerned 510 women; 242 of them had adenomyosis confirmed by a pathological examination. The pathological prevalence of adenomyosis was 47.4% in this study. A preoperative sonography was available for 89.4% of the 242 women, with a suspicion of adenomyosis in 32.7% of them. In this study, Sensitivity is 52%, Specificity 85%, Positive Predictive Value (PPV) 77%, Negative Predictive Value (NPV) 86% and Accuracy 38,1%. CONCLUSIONS: Pelvic sonography is the most common non-invasive examination used in gynecology. It is also the first recommended examination for the diagnosis of adenomyosis because of its acceptability and its cost, even if the diagnosis performances are moderate. However, these performances are comparable to MRI (Magnetic Resonance Imaging) performances. The use of a standardized sonographic classification could improve and harmonize the diagnosis of adenomyosis.
Full text 1,068 characters · extracted from oa-html · click to expand
Making sure you're not a bot! Loading... You are seeing this because the administrator of this website has set up Anubis to protect the server against the scourge of AI companies aggressively scraping websites. This can and does cause downtime for the websites, which makes their resources inaccessible for everyone. Anubis is a compromise. Anubis uses a Proof-of-Work scheme in the vein of Hashcash, a proposed proof-of-work scheme for reducing email spam. The idea is that at individual scales the additional load is ignorable, but at mass scraper levels it adds up and makes scraping much more expensive. Ultimately, this is a placeholder solution so that more time can be spent on fingerprinting and identifying headless browsers (EG: via how they do font rendering) so that the challenge proof of work page doesn't need to be presented to users that are much more likely to be legitimate. Please note that Anubis requires the use of modern JavaScript features that plugins like JShelter will disable. Please disable JShelter or other such plugins for this domain.

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-html

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

MeSH descriptors

Adenomyosis Adenomyosis Adenomyosis Adenomyosis Adenomyosis Adenomyosis Adenomyosis Adenomyosis Adenomyosis Adenomyosis Adenomyosis Adenomyosis Adenomyosis Adenomyosis Adenomyosis Adenomyosis Adenomyosis Adenomyosis Adenomyosis Adenomyosis

Citation neighborhood (no data yet)

We don't have any in-corpus citations linked to this paper yet. The paper's references may be in our DB but unresolved to ``paper_id`` (resolution happens at ingest when the cited DOI matches a row we already have). Run the cross-source citation reconcile pass to retry.

Source provenance

europepmc
last seen: 2026-08-01T06:07:04.264727+00:00
pubmed
last seen: 2026-08-01T06:06:12.806241+00:00
unpaywall
last seen: 2026-05-14T19:30:52.867331+00:00
License: CC-BY-NC-4.0 · commercial use OK · attribution required
Courtesy of the U.S. National Library of Medicine