OBJECTIVE: To compare sonographic and magnetic resonance imaging findings in deep endometriosis with emphasis on intestinal involvement. MATERIALS AND METHODS: Eighteen women aged between 23 and 49 years with clinical suspicion and gynecological signs suggestive of deep endometriosis were submitted to ultrasonography and magnetic resonance imaging for correlation between findings. RESULTS: Ultrasonography detected 40 lesions while magnetic resonance imaging detected 53 lesions in the pelvis. A comparative study has not shown any statistically significant intermethod difference in the detection of lesions (respectively p > 0.19 and p > 0.14). In the rectosigmoid junction, magnetic resonance imaging has detected one (5.6%) lesion, while ultrasonography has detected four lesions (22.2%). In the rectum, ultrasonography has detected eight lesions (44.4%), and magnetic resonance imaging has detected seven lesions (38.9%). CONCLUSION: The intermethod agreement has not been good for lesions in the rectosigmoid junction, considering that ultrasonography has detected a higher number of lesions in this region, but a lower number of lesions in the pelvis as compared with magnetic resonance imaging. The global comparative analysis has demonstrated no statistically significant intermethod difference in the detection of lesions. Low cost, good tolerability and high availability make ultrasonography a valuable diagnostic tool in cases of deep endometriosis.

Keywords: Deep endometriosis, Diagnosis, Transvaginal ultrasonography, Magnetic resonance imaging

Endometriosis is characterized by the presence of normal endometrial tissue outside the uterine cavity. In patients with deep pelvic endometriosis, uterosacral ligaments, rectum, rectovaginal septum, vagina or bladder may be involved. Clinical manifestations may be variable, including pelvic pain, dysmenorrhea, dyspareunia, urinary symptoms and infertility. Complete surgical excision is the gold standard for treating this disease, and hence the importance of the preoperative work-up that usually is limited to an evaluation of sonographic and clinical data. Magnetic resonance imaging is of paramount importance in the diagnosis of endometriosis, considering its high accuracy in the identification of lesions intermingled with adhesions, and in the determination of peritoneal lesions extent. The present pictorial review describes the main magnetic resonance imaging findings in deep pelvic endometriosis.

Keywords: Magnetic resonance imaging, Endometriosis, Female pelvis, Infertility

Endometriosis is defined as the presence of functional endometrial tissue outside the endometrial cavity and myometrium. Although this is a frequent disease with multifactorial causes, involvement of the lower urinary tract is rare. Magnetic resonance imaging is highly sensitive, specific and accurate in the diagnosis of endometriosis in the lower urinary tract, especially for allowing the identification of lesions obscured by adhesions or with subperitoneal extension. The present iconographic essay presents the main magnetic resonance imaging findings of the lower urinary tract involvement by endometriosis.

Keywords: Magnetic resonance imaging, Endometriosis, Infertility, Genitourinary tract, Bladder, Urethra

OBJECTIVE: To study the utility of diffusion-weighted magnetic resonance imaging in the differentiation between benign and malignant breast lesions. MATERIALS AND METHODS: Forty-five women (mean age, 46.1 years) with 52 focal breast lesions underwent diffusionweighted magnetic resonance imaging. The calculation of apparent diffusion coefficient (ADC) was based on the ADC map reflecting five b values (0, 250, 500, 750, and 1000 s/mm²). The mean ADC value of each lesion was correlated with imaging findings and histopathologic results. Cutoff ADC, sensitivity and specificity of diffusion-weighted imaging in the differentiation between benign and malignant lesions were calculated. P < 0.05 was considered as statistically significant. RESULTS: The mean ADC was significantly lower for malignant lesions (0.92 ± 0.26 × 10-3 mm²/s) as compared with benign lesions (1.50 ± 0.34 × 10-3 mm²/s) (P < 0.0001). Diffusion-weighted imaging showed high sensitivity and specificity (both, 92.3%) in the differentiation between benign and malignant lesions. CONCLUSION: Diffusion-weighted imaging is a potential resource as an adjuvant to breast magnetic resonance imaging to differentiate benign from malignant lesions. Such sequence can be easily added to the standard breast magnetic resonance imaging protocol, without implying any significant increase in examination time.

Keywords: Breast cancer, Diffusion-weighted imaging, Magnetic resonance imaging