A systematic approach to the magnetic resonance imaging-based differential diagnosis of congenital Müllerian duct anomalies and their mimics

Müllerian duct anomalies (MDAs) represent a wide spectrum of developmental abnormalities related to various gynecologic and obstetric complications, including primary amenorrhea, infertility, and endometriosis. The use of diverse imaging modalities, in conjunction with clinical information, provide important clues to the diagnosis of MDAs. Diagnostic imaging work-up for MDAs often begins with hysterosalpingography (HSG) and/or ultrasonography (US). Although HSG and/or US may suffice to detect the presence of a uterine abnormality, magnetic resonance (MR) imaging is generally needed to classify the abnormality into a specific MDA category. MR imaging has been gaining in popularity for use in evaluating MDAs, by virtue of its noninvasiveness, lack of ionizing radiation, and capability for multiplanar imaging and soft tissue characterization. Abnormalities in the external uterine fundal contour are readily recognized with MR imaging, allowing for clear differentiation between a fusion anomaly, such as a uterus didelphys or a bicornuate uterus, and a resorption anomaly, such as a septate uterus. Furthermore, MR imaging enables clear depiction of a rudimentary uterine horn in a unicornuate uterus. Accurate differential diagnosis of MDAs on the basis of their characteristic MR imaging findings is crucial, because the rates of gynecologic and obstetric complications vary considerably among MDAs. The diagnostic accuracy may be enhanced by adopting a systematic approach to MR imaging-based differential diagnosis. Similar content being viewed by others

Behr SC, Courtier JL, Qayyum A (2012) Imaging of Müllerian duct anomalies. Radiographics 32:E233–E250 Troiano RN, McCarthy SM (2004) Müllerian duct anomalies: imaging and clinical issues. Radiology 233:19–34 Devi Wold AS, Pham N, Arici A (2006) Anatomic factors in recurrent pregnancy loss. Semin Reprod Med 24:25–32 Li S, Qayyum A, Coakley FV, Hricak H (2000) Association of renal agenesis and Müllerian duct anomalies. J Comput Assist Tomogr 24:829–834 Oppelt P, Renner SP, Kellermann A, et al. (2006) Clinical aspects of Mayer–Rokitansky–Kuester–Hauser syndrome: recommendations for clinical diagnosis and staging. Hum Reprod 21:792–797 Pittock ST, Babovic-Vuksanovic D, Lteif A (2005) Mayer–Rokitansky–Küster–Hauser anomaly and its associated malformations. Am J Med Genet A 135:314–316 Gell JS (2003) Müllerian anomalies. Semin Reprod Med 21:375–388 Kimberley N, Hutson JM, Southwell BR, Grover SR (2012) Vaginal agenesis, the hymen, and associated anomalies. J Pediatr Adolesc Gynecol 25:54–58 Robbins JB, Parry JP, Guite KM, et al. (2012) MRI of pregnancy-related issues: Müllerian duct anomalies. AJR Am J Roentgenol 198:302–310 Marcal L, Nothaft MA, Coelho F, Volpato R, Iyer R (2011) Müllerian duct anomalies: MR imaging. Abdom Imaging 36:756–764 Buttram VC Jr, Gibbons WE (1979) Müllerian anomalies: a proposed classification. (An analysis of 144 cases). Fertil Steril 32:40–46 Buttram VC, Gomel V, Siegler A, et al. (1988) The American Fertility Society classifications of adnexal adhesions, distal tubal occlusion, tubal occlusion secondary to tubal ligation, tubal pregnancies, Müllerian anomalies and intrauterine adhesions. Fertil Steril 49:944–955 Olpin JD, Heilbrun M (2009) Imaging of Müllerian duct anomalies. Clin Obstet Gynecol 52:40–56 Giusti S, Fruzzetti E, Perini D, et al. (2011) Diagnosis of a variant of Mayer–Rokitansky–Küster–Hauser syndrome: useful MRI findings. Abdom Imaging 36:753–755 Lamarca M, Navarro R, Ballesteros ME, et al. (2009) Leiomyomas in both uterine remnants in a woman with the Mayer–Rokitansky–Küster–Hauser syndrome. Fertil Steril 91(931):e13–e15 Pompili G, Munari A, Franceschelli G, et al. (2009) Magnetic resonance imaging in the preoperative assessment of Mayer–Rokitansky–Küster–Hauser syndrome. Radiol Med 114:811–826 Reinhold C, Hricak H, Forstner R, et al. (1997) Primary amenorrhea: evaluation with MR imaging. Radiology 203:383–390 Zhou JH, Sun J, Yang CB, et al. (2010) Long-term outcomes of transvestibular vaginoplasty with pelvic peritoneum in 182 patients with Rokitansky’s syndrome. Fertil Steril 94:2281–2285 Morcel K, Camborieux L, Programme de Recherches sur les Aplasies Müllériennes, Guerrier D (2007) Mayer–Rokitansky–Küster–Hauser (MRKH) syndrome. Orphanet J Rare Dis 2:13–21 Jurkiewicz B, Matuszewski L, Cislak R, Rybak D (2006) Rokitansky–Kustner–Hauser syndrome—a case report. Eur J Pediatr Surg 16:135–137 Yoo RE, Cho JY, Kim SY, Kim SH (2013) Magnetic resonance evaluation of Müllerian remnants in Mayer–Rokitansky–Küster–Hauser syndrome. Korean J Radiol 14:233–239 Fiaschetti V, Taglieri A, Gisone V, Coco I, Simonetti G (2012) Mayer–Rokitansky–Küster–Hauser syndrome diagnosed by magnetic resonance imaging. Role of imaging to identify and evaluate the uncommon variation in development of the female genital tract. J Radiol Case Rep 6:17–24 Junqueira BL, Allen LM, Spitzer RF, et al. (2009) Müllerian duct anomalies and mimics in children and adolescents: correlative intraoperative assessment with clinical imaging. Radiographics 29:1085–1103 Olive DL, Henderson DY (1987) Endometriosis and Müllerian anomalies. Obstet Gynecol 69(3 Pt 1):412–415 Ugur M, Turan C, Mungan T, et al. (1995) Endometriosis in association with Müllerian anomalies. Gynecol Obstet Invest 40:261–264 Jayasinghe Y, Rane A, Stalewski H, Grover S (2005) The presentation and early diagnosis of the rudimentary uterine horn. Obstet Gynecol 105:1456–1467 Carrington BM, Hricak H, Nuruddin RN, et al. (1990) Müllerian duct anomalies: MR imaging evaluation. Radiology 176:715–720 Pellerito JS, McCarthy SM, Doyle MB, Glickman MG, DeCherney AH (1992) Diagnosis of uterine anomalies: relative accuracy of MR imaging, endovaginal sonography, and hysterosalpingography. Radiology 183:795–800 Wang B, Zhou JH, Jin HM (2011) Torsion of a rudimentary uterine horn at 22 weeks of gestation. J Obstet Gynaecol Res 37:919–920 Sarto GE, Simpson JL (1978) Abnormalities of the Müllerian and Wolffian duct systems. Birth Defects Orig Artic Ser 14(6C):37–54 Del Vescovo R, Battisti S, Di Paola V, et al. (2012) Herlyn–Werner–Wunderlich syndrome: MRI findings, radiological guide (two cases and literature review), and differential diagnosis. BMC Med Imaging 12:4 Han BH, Park SB, Lee YJ, Lee KS, Lee YK (2013) Uterus didelphys with blind hemivagina and ipsilateral renal agenesis (Herlyn–Werner–Wunderlich syndrome) suspected on the presence of hydrocolpos on prenatal sonography. J Clin Ultrasound 41:380–382 Fedele L, Dorta M, Brioschi D, Massari C, Candiani GB (1989) Magnetic resonance evaluation of double uteri. Obstet Gynecol 74:844–847 Candiani GB, Fedele L, Parazzini F, Zamberletti D (1990) Reproductive prognosis after abdominal metroplasty in bicornuate or septate uterus: a life table analysis. Br J Obstet Gynaecol 97:613–617 Raga F, Bonilla-Musoles F, Blanes J, Osborne NG (1996) Congenital Müllerian anomalies: diagnostic accuracy of three-dimensional ultrasound. Fertil Steril 65:523–528 Chan YY, Jayaprakasan K, Tan A, et al. (2011) Reproductive outcomes in women with congenital uterine anomalies: a systematic review. Ultrasound Obstet Gynecol 38:371–382 Propst AM, Hill JA 3rd (2000) Anatomic factors associated with recurrent pregnancy loss. Semin Reprod Med 18:341–350 Fedele L, Bianchi S (1995) Hysteroscopic metroplasty for septate uterus. Obstet Gynecol Clin N Am 22:473–489 Fayez JA (1986) Comparison between abdominal and hysteroscopic metroplasty. Obstet Gynecol 68:399–403 Raga F, Bauset C, Remohi J, et al. (1997) Reproductive impact of congenital Müllerian anomalies. Hum Reprod 12:2277–2281 Heinonen PK, Saarikoski S, Pystynen P (1982) Reproductive performance of women with uterine anomalies. An evaluation of 182 cases. Acta Obstet Gynecol Scand 61:157–162 Kupesic S, Kurjak A (1998) Septate uterus: detection and prediction of obstetrical complications by different forms of ultrasonography. J Ultrasound Med 17:631–636 Zreik TG, Troiano RN, Ghoussoub RA, et al. (1998) Myometrial tissue in uterine septa. J Am Assoc Gynecol Laparosc 5:155–160 Chandler TM, Machan LS, Cooperberg PL, Harris AC, Chang SD (2009) Müllerian duct anomalies: from diagnosis to intervention. Br J Radiol 82:1034–1042 Tulandi T, Arronet GH, McInnes RA (1980) Arcuate and bicornuate uterine anomalies and infertility. Fertil Steril 34:362–364 Nakhal RS, Hall-Craggs M, Freeman A, et al. (2013) Evaluation of retained testes in adolescent girls and women with complete androgen insensitivity syndrome. Radiology 268:153–160 Hughes IA, Deeb A (2006) Androgen resistance. Best Pract Res Clin Endocrinol Metab 20:577–598 Cools M, Drop SL, Wolffenbuttel KP, Oosterhuis JW, Looijenga LH (2006) Germ cell tumors in the intersex gonad: old paths, new directions, moving frontiers. Endocr Rev 27:468–484 Deans R, Creighton SM, Liao LM, Conway GS (2012) Timing of gonadectomy in adult women with complete androgen insensitivity syndrome (CAIS): patient preferences and clinical evidence. Clin Endocrinol (Oxf) 76:894–898 Burgis J (2001) Obstructive Müllerian anomalies: case report, diagnosis, and management. Am J Obstet Gynecol 185:338–344 Author information Authors and Affiliations Corresponding author Electronic supplementary material Below is the link to the electronic supplementary material. Rights and permissions About this article Cite this article Yoo, RE., Cho, J.Y., Kim, S.Y. et al. A systematic approach to the magnetic resonance imaging-based differential diagnosis of congenital Müllerian duct anomalies and their mimics. Abdom Imaging 40, 192–206 (2015). https://doi.org/10.1007/s00261-014-0195-9 Published: Issue date: DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s00261-014-0195-9