Department of Diagnostic Imaging and Nuclear Medicine, Kyoto University Graduate School of Medicine, Kyoto University, Kyoto, Japan.
Department of Diagnostic Imaging and Nuclear Medicine, Kyoto University Graduate School of Medicine, Kyoto University, Kyoto, Japan.
Clin Radiol. 2020 Jul;75(7):543-551. doi: 10.1016/j.crad.2020.02.013. Epub 2020 Mar 21.
To investigate whether contrast-enhanced (CE)-magnetic resonance imaging (MRI) improves identification of implantation site of ectopic pregnancy.
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.
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).
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.
探讨对比增强(CE)磁共振成像(MRI)是否能提高异位妊娠植入部位的识别能力。
本回顾性研究纳入了 63 例经组织病理学证实植入部位的患者。两名妇科影像学专家和两名非专家放射科医生分别独立对非 CE MRI 和非 CE+CE-MRI(非 CE+CE-MRI)进行了检查,然后根据置信水平确定了植入部位。还评估了以下 MRI 特征:宫外妊娠囊(GS)样结构(形状、T1 加权成像[WI]、T2WI 和弥散加权成像[DWI]的信号强度、三环外观的存在以及 T2WI 上明显的低信号区、树或点状成分的存在、增强程度)、输卵管(扩张、扩张伴血肿、增强程度、管内增强成分)和腹水。比较了非 CE 和非 CE+CE-MRI 数据以及专家和非专家组的这些发现。
在非 CE 和非 CE+CE-MRI 中,专家组正确识别了 58/63(92%)例植入部位。在非专家组中,非 CE MRI 的正确识别率从 54/63(86%)提高到非 CE+CE-MRI 的 58/63(92%),但无显著差异(p=0.29)。与非 CE 和非 CE+CE-MRI 相比,在非专家组中,输卵管扩张更为常见(p=0.004),非 CE+CE-MRI 的置信度显著提高(p<0.0001)。组间比较显示,非 CE MRI 中专家组的置信度明显高于非专家组(p<0.0001),而在非 CE+CE-MRI 中差异无统计学意义(p=0.49)。
CE-MRI 并未显著提高异位妊娠植入部位的正确识别率,尽管增强对比剂的添加确实使非专家放射科医生能够有信心地诊断。