The DOI matches its Crossref record; 1 of the 1 references it cites were found in a registry or an index.
Ultrasonography compared with magnetic resonance imaging for the diagnosis of adenomyosis: correlation with histopathology
Abstract
BACKGROUND: The objective of this study was to compare the accuracy of transabdominal (TAUS) and transvaginal sonography (TVUS) and magnetic resonance imaging (MRI) for the diagnosis of adenomyosis, and to correlate imaging with histological findings. METHODS: In a prospective study, 120 consecutive patients referred for hysterectomy underwent TAUS, TVUS and MRI. Results of these examinations were interpreted blindly to histopathological findings. RESULTS: Histological prevalence of adenomyosis and leiomyomas was 33.0 and 47.5% respectively. Adenomyotic uteri were accompanied by additional pelvic disorders in 82.5% of cases. Sensitivity, specificity, and positive and negative predictive values of TAUS and TVUS were 32.5 and 65.0%, 95.0 and 97.5%, 76.4 and 92.8%, and 73.8 and 88.8% respectively. Myometrial cyst was the most sensitive and specific TVUS criterion. In MRI, the presence of a high-signal-intensity myometrial spot was as specific but less sensitive than a maximal junctional zone thickness (JZ(max)) >12 mm and a JZ(max) to myometrial thickness ratio >40%. Sensitivity, specificity, and positive and negative predictive values of MRI were 77.5, 92.5, 83.8 and 89.2% respectively. No difference in accuracy was found between TVUS and MRI, but sensitivity was lower with sonography in women with associated myomas. CONCLUSIONS: TVUS is as efficient as MRI for the diagnosis of adenomyosis in women without myoma, while MRI could be recommended for women with associated leiomyoma.
Overview
The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.
Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.
Integrity signals
Registry
Cites
Statistics
Verification
Claims the paper makes
The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.
Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.
Self-check
Percentages, sums and reported differences re-computed from the paper’s own numbers.
The self-check needs the paper’s full text.
Citations
Cites
Uterine junctional zone, function and disease
Brosens, J. J., de Souza, N. M., & Barker, F. G. (1995) · The Lancet · doi:10.1016/s0140-6736(95)91387-4 · Cited by 215 · cited 5×
“It is difficult to compare our data with those of previous studies, in which the main criterion used for adenomyosis was an alteration of myometrial echotexture, not myometrial cyst (Ascher et al., 1994; Brosens et al., 1995b; Reinhold et al., 1995, 1996; Vercellini et al., 1998).”
BackgroundResultInfluential
Cited by
Deep Pelvic Endometriosis: MR Imaging for Diagnosis and Prediction of Extension of Disease
Bazot, M., Darai, E., Hourani, R., Thomassin, I., Cortez, A., Uzan, S., & Buy, J.-N. (2004) · Radiology · doi:10.1148/radiol.2322030762 · Cited by 580
Self-citationBazot, M., Lafont, C., Rouzier, R., Roseau, G., Thomassin-Naggara, I., & Daraï, E. (2009) · Fertility and Sterility · doi:10.1016/j.fertnstert.2008.09.005 · Cited by 434
Self-citationPathology and physiopathology of adenomyosis
Bergeron, C., Amant, F., & Ferenczy, A. (2006) · Best Practice & Research Clinical Obstetrics & Gynaecology · doi:10.1016/j.bpobgyn.2006.01.016 · Cited by 359
Adenomyosis, epidemiological factors
Vercellini, P., Viganò, P., Somigliana, E., Daguati, R., Abbiati, A., & Fedele, L. (2006) · Best Practice & Research Clinical Obstetrics & Gynaecology · doi:10.1016/j.bpobgyn.2006.01.017 · Cited by 319
Chapron, C., Tosti, C., Marcellin, L., Bourdon, M., Lafay-Pillet, M.-C., Millischer, A.-E., Streuli, I., Borghese, B., Petraglia, F., & Santulli, P. (2017) · Human Reproduction · doi:10.1093/humrep/dex088 · Cited by 294
Metadata
- Authors
- Bazot, M., Cortez, A., Darai, E., Rouger, J., Chopier, J., Antoine, J.-M., & Uzan, S.
- Venue
- Human Reproduction
- Publisher
- Oxford University Press (OUP)
- Published
- 2001-11
- Volume
- 16
- Issue
- 11
- Pages
- 2427-2433
- ISSN
- 0268-1161 (ISSN-L)
- 1460-2350
- OpenAlex
- W2154062513
- Cited by
- 509
- References
- 1
- FWCI
- 5.51
- Type
- journal article
- Language
- en
- Open access
- closed
About these checks
Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.
Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.
Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.
What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›
Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review
How to cite
Cite CoChat for the checks on this page, and the paper for its own findings.
- This page
- CoChat. (2026). Citation check: Ultrasonography compared with magnetic resonance imaging for the diagnosis of adenomyosis: correlation with histopathology. https://app.cochat.ai/papers/10.1093/humrep/16.11.2427
- The paper
- Bazot, M., Cortez, A., Darai, E., Rouger, J., Chopier, J., Antoine, J.-M., & Uzan, S. (2001). Ultrasonography compared with magnetic resonance imaging for the diagnosis of adenomyosis: correlation with histopathology. Human Reproduction. https://doi.org/10.1093/humrep/16.11.2427
Data sources
Bibliographic data: Semantic Scholar, OpenAlex, Crossref.
Contains information from the Semantic Scholar Academic Graph Datasets, made available under the ODC Attribution License (ODC-BY 1.0).
Semantic Scholar’s data is described in: Kinney, R., et al. (2023). The Semantic Scholar Open Data Platform. arXiv:2301.10140.