TY - JOUR
T1 - Investigation of clinical utility of contrast-enhanced MRI in the diagnosis of ectopic pregnancy
AU - Nishio, N.
AU - Kido, A.
AU - Kurata, Y.
AU - Minami, M.
AU - Tokunaga, K.
AU - Honda, M.
AU - Mandai, M.
AU - Togashi, K.
N1 - Publisher Copyright:
© 2020 The Royal College of Radiologists
PY - 2020/7
Y1 - 2020/7
N2 - AIM: To investigate whether contrast-enhanced (CE)-magnetic resonance imaging (MRI) improves identification of implantation site of ectopic pregnancy. MATERIALS AND METHODS: This retrospective study enrolled 63 patients in whom implantation sites had been confirmed at histopathology. Two expert radiologists for gynaecological imaging and two inexpert radiologists independently reviewed non-CE MRI and a combination of non-CE and CE-MRI (non-CE+CE-MRI), then determined implantation site with a confidence level. The following MRI features were also evaluated: extrauterine gestational sac (GS)-like structure (shape, signal intensities at T1-weighted imaging [WI], T2WI, and diffusion-weighted imaging [DWI], presence of the three rings appearance, and distinct low intensity areas at T2WI, presence of tree or dot-like components, degree of contrast enhancement), fallopian tube (dilatation, dilatation with haematoma, degree of contrast enhancement, enhanced components within the tube), and ascites. These findings were compared for non-CE and non-CE+CE-MRI data, and for expert and inexpert groups. RESULTS: The expert group identified implantation sites correctly in 58/63 (92%) cases for non-CE and non-CE+CE-MRI. In the inexpert group, the correct identification was improved from 54/63 (86%) using non-CE MRI to 58/63 (92%) using non-CE+CE-MRI, but was not significant (p=0.29). In comparison between non-CE and non-CE+CE-MRI, dilation of the fallopian tubes was observed more frequently (p=0.004) and the confidence level was elevated significantly in the non-CE+CE-MRI (p<0.0001) in the inexpert group. Intergroup comparison revealed that confidence level was significantly higher in the expert group than in the inexpert group using non-CE MRI (p<0.0001), although the difference was not significant at non-CE+CE MRI (p=0.49). CONCLUSION: CE-MRI did not significantly improve correct identification of ectopic pregnancy implantation sites, although the addition of contrast enhancement did enable inexpert radiologists to diagnose confidently.
AB - AIM: To investigate whether contrast-enhanced (CE)-magnetic resonance imaging (MRI) improves identification of implantation site of ectopic pregnancy. MATERIALS AND METHODS: This retrospective study enrolled 63 patients in whom implantation sites had been confirmed at histopathology. Two expert radiologists for gynaecological imaging and two inexpert radiologists independently reviewed non-CE MRI and a combination of non-CE and CE-MRI (non-CE+CE-MRI), then determined implantation site with a confidence level. The following MRI features were also evaluated: extrauterine gestational sac (GS)-like structure (shape, signal intensities at T1-weighted imaging [WI], T2WI, and diffusion-weighted imaging [DWI], presence of the three rings appearance, and distinct low intensity areas at T2WI, presence of tree or dot-like components, degree of contrast enhancement), fallopian tube (dilatation, dilatation with haematoma, degree of contrast enhancement, enhanced components within the tube), and ascites. These findings were compared for non-CE and non-CE+CE-MRI data, and for expert and inexpert groups. RESULTS: The expert group identified implantation sites correctly in 58/63 (92%) cases for non-CE and non-CE+CE-MRI. In the inexpert group, the correct identification was improved from 54/63 (86%) using non-CE MRI to 58/63 (92%) using non-CE+CE-MRI, but was not significant (p=0.29). In comparison between non-CE and non-CE+CE-MRI, dilation of the fallopian tubes was observed more frequently (p=0.004) and the confidence level was elevated significantly in the non-CE+CE-MRI (p<0.0001) in the inexpert group. Intergroup comparison revealed that confidence level was significantly higher in the expert group than in the inexpert group using non-CE MRI (p<0.0001), although the difference was not significant at non-CE+CE MRI (p=0.49). CONCLUSION: CE-MRI did not significantly improve correct identification of ectopic pregnancy implantation sites, although the addition of contrast enhancement did enable inexpert radiologists to diagnose confidently.
UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/record.url?scp=85081994722&partnerID=8YFLogxK
U2 - 10.1016/j.crad.2020.02.013
DO - 10.1016/j.crad.2020.02.013
M3 - 学術論文
C2 - 32209236
AN - SCOPUS:85081994722
SN - 0009-9260
VL - 75
SP - 543
EP - 551
JO - Clinical Radiology
JF - Clinical Radiology
IS - 7
ER -