Transvaginal ultrasound and magnetic resonance imaging in the diagnosis of endometrioma: a systematic review and meta-analysis of diagnostic test accuracy studies.

Diagnostic test accuracy endometrioma endometriosis magnetic resonance imaging transvaginal ultrasound

Journal

Journal of obstetrics and gynaecology : the journal of the Institute of Obstetrics and Gynaecology
ISSN: 1364-6893
Titre abrégé: J Obstet Gynaecol
Pays: England
ID NLM: 8309140

Informations de publication

Date de publication:
Dec 2024
Historique:
medline: 13 2 2024
pubmed: 13 2 2024
entrez: 13 2 2024
Statut: ppublish

Résumé

The diagnosis of endometriomas in patients with endometriosis is of primary importance because it influences the management and prognosis of infertility and pain. Imaging techniques are evolving constantly. This study aimed to systematically assess the diagnostic accuracy of transvaginal ultrasound (TVUS) and magnetic resonance imaging (MRI) in detecting endometrioma using the surgical visualisation of lesions with or without histopathological confirmation as reference standards in patients of reproductive age with suspected endometriosis. PubMed, Embase, Web of Science, Cumulative Index to Nursing and Allied Health Literature and ClinicalTrials.gov databases were searched from their inception to 12 October 2022, using a manual search for additional articles. Two authors independently performed title, abstract and full-text screening of the identified records, extracted study details and quantitative data and assessed the quality of the studies using the 'Quality Assessment of Diagnostic Accuracy Study 2' tool. Bivariate random-effects models were used to determine the pooled sensitivity and specificity, compare the two imaging modalities and evaluate the sources of heterogeneity. Sixteen prospective studies (10 assessing TVUS, 4 assessing MRI and 2 assessing both TVUS and MRI) were included, representing 1976 participants. Pooled TVUS and MRI sensitivities for endometrioma were 0.89 (95% confidence interval 'CI', 0.86-0.92) and 0.94 (95% CI, 0.74-0.99), respectively (indirect comparison TVUS and MRI have high accuracy for diagnosing endometriomas; however, high-quality studies comparing the two modalities are lacking. The diagnosis of endometriomas in patients with endometriosis impacts infertility and pain management. We performed a systematic review and meta-analysis to assess the accuracy of transvaginal ultrasound and magnetic resonance imaging for the diagnosis of endometrioma in patients of reproductive age with suspected endometriosis, and to compare the accuracy of the two imaging modalities. Five databases (PubMed, Embase, Web of Science, Cumulative Index to Nursing and Allied Health Literature and ClinicalTrials.gov databases) were searched. Sixteen prospective studies were included, representing 1976 participants. We found high accuracy of transvaginal ultrasound and magnetic resonance imaging for diagnosing endometriomas. There was no statistically significant difference in diagnostic accuracy between the two modalities. However, high-quality studies comparing the two modalities in the same population are lacking.

Autres résumés

Type: plain-language-summary (eng)
The diagnosis of endometriomas in patients with endometriosis impacts infertility and pain management. We performed a systematic review and meta-analysis to assess the accuracy of transvaginal ultrasound and magnetic resonance imaging for the diagnosis of endometrioma in patients of reproductive age with suspected endometriosis, and to compare the accuracy of the two imaging modalities. Five databases (PubMed, Embase, Web of Science, Cumulative Index to Nursing and Allied Health Literature and ClinicalTrials.gov databases) were searched. Sixteen prospective studies were included, representing 1976 participants. We found high accuracy of transvaginal ultrasound and magnetic resonance imaging for diagnosing endometriomas. There was no statistically significant difference in diagnostic accuracy between the two modalities. However, high-quality studies comparing the two modalities in the same population are lacking.

Identifiants

pubmed: 38348799
doi: 10.1080/01443615.2024.2311664
doi:

Types de publication

Journal Article Review

Langues

eng

Sous-ensembles de citation

IM

Pagination

2311664

Auteurs

Fleur Serge Kanti (FS)

Centre de recherche du CHU de Québec - Université Laval, Quebec City, Canada.

Rose Gorak Savard (R)

Centre de recherche du CHU de Québec - Université Laval, Quebec City, Canada.

Frédéric Bergeron (F)

Université Laval, Quebec City, Canada.

Hervé Tchala Vignon Zomahoun (HTV)

Centre de recherche sur les soins et les services de première ligne (CERSSPL) - Université Laval, Quebec City, Canada.

Antoine Netter (A)

Department of Gynecology-Obstetrics and Reproductive Medicine, AP-HM, La Conception Hospital, Marseille, France.
Institut méditerranéen de biodiversité et d'écologie marine et continentale (IMBE), Aix Marseille University, CNRS, IRD, Marseille, France.

Sarah Maheux-Lacroix (S)

Centre de recherche du CHU de Québec - Université Laval, Quebec City, Canada.

Classifications MeSH