Magnetic Resonance Imaging Compared with Rectal Endoscopic Sonography for the Prediction of Infiltration Depth in Colorectal Endometriosis

Arane Kim, Kim A, Fernandez P, P. Fernandez, Pedro Fernandez, Brigitte Martin, Martin B, Laurent Palazzo, Palazzo L, Lara Ribeiro‐Parenti, Lara Ribeiro-Parenti, Ribeiro-Parenti L, Walker F, Francine Walker, Bucau M, Margot Bucau, Helene Collinot, Collinot H, Dominique Luton, Luton D, Martin Koskas
Journal of Minimally Invasive Gynecology · 2017 · vol. 24(7) , pp. 1218–1226 · doi:10.1016/j.jmig.2017.07.026 · PMID:28802956 · W2744735150
Diagnostic accuracy OA: closed CC0 ⤵ 15 in-corpus citations
View on OpenAlex View on PubMed View at publisher
⚙ AI-generated summary by gemini-2.5-flash-lite, 2026-06-08 ⓘ

This study compared magnetic resonance imaging and rectal endoscopic sonography to determine their accuracy in predicting the infiltration depth of colorectal endometriosis.

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

Abstract

STUDY OBJECTIVE: To compare the accuracies of magnetic resonance imaging (MRI) and rectal endoscopic sonography (RES) in the prediction of the infiltration depth of colorectal endometriosis. DESIGN: A retrospective cohort study (Canadian Task Force classification II-2). SETTING: A university teaching hospital. PATIENTS: Forty patients with symptomatic deep infiltrating endometriosis (DIE) of the rectum who underwent colorectal resection were included. INTERVENTIONS: All patients underwent abdominopelvic MRI and RES preoperatively to assess the infiltration depth of colorectal endometriosis, and segmental resection of the rectosigmoid by laparoscopy was performed if RES showed bowel invasion. Sensitivity, specificity, positive predictive value (PPV), negative predictive value (NPV), positive and negative likelihood ratios (LRs), and intermethod agreement were calculated for DIE muscularis and submucosal/mucosal infiltration confirmed by histopathological analysis. MEASUREMENTS AND MAIN RESULTS: For MRI detection of DIE muscularis infiltration, the sensitivity, specificity, PPV, NPV, and negative LR were 68%, 100%, 100%, 20%, and 0.32, respectively. For the MRI detection of DIE submucosal/mucosal involvement, the sensitivity, specificity, PPV, NPV, and positive and negative LRs were 47%, 81%, 69%, 63%, 2.49, and 0.65, respectively. The PPV of RES detection of DIE muscularis infiltration was 93%. For the RES detection of DIE submucosal/mucosal layers, the sensitivity, specificity, PPV, NPV, and positive and negative LRs were 79%, 48%, 58%, 71%, 1.51, and 0.44, respectively. CONCLUSION: In the current study, MRI is valuable for detecting endometriosis of the rectum but is less accurate in detecting submucosal/mucosal involvement than RES. Magnetic resonance imaging was not successful for preoperative determination of segmental resection versus a more conservative approach. When bowel involvement is detected by MRI, RES is not essential. When symptoms suggest DIE in patients without intestinal lesions detected by MRI, RES is necessary to exclude bowel invasion.

My notes (saved in your browser only)

Condition tags

endometriosis

MeSH descriptors

Colonic Diseases Endometriosis Endosonography Magnetic Resonance Imaging Magnetic Resonance Imaging Rectal Diseases Rectum Adult Adult Colonic Diseases Colonic Diseases Colonic Diseases Endometriosis Endometriosis Endometriosis Endosonography Endosonography Female Female Humans

Citation neighborhood (2-hop)

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. Outer rings show 2-hop neighbours — papers reached through the immediate citers/citees. [ collapse to 1-hop ]

References (32)

Cited by (14)

Source provenance

europepmc
last seen: 2026-10-16T06:09:50.462052+00:00
openalex
last seen: 2026-06-10T17:14:06.276822+00:00
pubmed
last seen: 2026-10-08T21:20:19.361389+00:00
License: CC0 · commercial use OK