Diagnostic ultrasound ( PDFDrive )

560 PART II Abdominal and Pelvic Sonography
61. Oppelt P, Renner SP, Brucker S, et al. he VCUAM (vagina cervix uterus
adnex–associated malformation) classiication: a new classiication for genital
malformations. Fertil Steril. 2005;84(5):1493-1497.
62. Bermejo C, Martinez Ten P, Cantarero R, et al. hree-dimensional ultrasound
in the diagnosis of müllerian duct anomalies and concordance with magnetic
resonance imaging. Ultrasound Obstet Gynecol. 2010;35(5):593-601.
63. Pellerito JS, McCarthy SM, Doyle MB, et al. Diagnosis of uterine anomalies:
relative accuracy of MR imaging, endovaginal sonography, and hysterosalpingography.
Radiology. 1992;183(3):795-800.
64. Zreik TG, Troiano RN, Ghoussoub RA, et al. Myometrial tissue in uterine
septa. J Am Assoc Gynecol Laparosc. 1998;5(2):155-160.
65. Salim R, Woelfer B, Backos M, et al. Reproducibility of three-dimensional
ultrasound diagnosis of congenital uterine anomalies. Ultrasound Obstet
Gynecol. 2003;21(6):578-582.
66. Wall DJ, Javitt MC, Glanc P, et al. ACR appropriateness Criteria® infertility.
Ultrasound Q. 2015;31(1):37-44.
67. Saravelos SH, Cocksedge KA, Li TC. Prevalence and diagnosis of congenital
uterine anomalies in women with reproductive failure: a critical appraisal.
Hum Reprod Update. 2008;14(5):415-429.
68. Agrawal G, Riherd JM, Busse RF, et al. Evaluation of uterine anomalies:
3D FRFSE cube versus standard 2D FRFSE. AJR Am J Roentgenol.
2009;193(6):W558-W562.
69. Ludwin A, Ludwin I. Comparison of the ESHRE-ESGE and ASRM classiications
of müllerian duct anomalies in everyday practice. Hum Reprod.
2015;30(3):569-580.
70. Brody JM, Koelliker SL, Frishman GN. Unicornuate uterus: imaging
appearance, associated anomalies, and clinical implications. AJR Am J
Roentgenol. 1998;171(5):1341-1347.
71. Smith BC, Brown DL, Carter RE, Famuyide AO. Double cervix: clarifying
a diagnostic dilemma. Am J Obstet Gynecol. 2014;211(1):26.e1-26.e5.
72. Stewart EA. Clinical practice. Uterine ibroids. N Engl J Med.
2015;372(17):1646-1655.
73. Goodwin SC, Bonilla SM, Sacks D, et al. Reporting standards for uterine
artery embolization for the treatment of uterine leiomyomata. J Vasc Interv
Radiol. 2001;12(9):1011-1020.
74. McLucas B. Diagnosis, imaging and anatomical classiication of uterine
ibroids. Best Pract Res Clin Obstet Gynaecol. 2008;22(4):627-642.
75. Munro MG, Critchley HO, Broder MS, Fraser IS. FIGO classiication system
(PALM-COEIN) for causes of abnormal uterine bleeding in nongravid
women of reproductive age. Int J Gynaecol Obstet. 2011;113(1):3-13.
76. Van den Bosch T, Dueholm M, Leone FP, et al. Terms, deinitions and
measurements to describe sonographic features of myometrium and uterine
masses: a consensus opinion from the Morphological Uterus Sonographic
Assessment (MUSA) group. Ultrasound Obstet Gynecol. 2015;46(3):284-
298.
77. Caoili EM, Hertzberg BS, Kliewer MA, et al. Refractory shadowing from
pelvic masses on sonography: a useful diagnostic sign for uterine leiomyomas.
AJR Am J Roentgenol. 2000;174(1):97-101.
78. Maebayashi T, Imai K, Takekawa Y, et al. Radiologic features of uterine
lipoleiomyoma. J Comput Assist Tomogr. 2003;27(2):162-165.
79. Prieto A, Crespo C, Pardo A, et al. Uterine lipoleiomyomas: US and CT
indings. Abdom Imaging. 2000;25(6):655-657.
80. Wang X, Kumar D, Seidman JD. Uterine lipoleiomyomas: a clinicopathologic
study of 50 cases. Int J Gynecol Pathol. 2006;25(3):239-242.
81. Akbulut M, Gundogan M, Yorukoglu A. Clinical and pathological features
of lipoleiomyoma of the uterine corpus: a review of 76 cases. Balkan Med
J. 2014;31(3):224-229.
82. Brown DL. Uterine leiomyomas. In: Fielding JR, Brown DL, hurmond
AS, editors. Gynecologic imaging. Philadelphia: Elsevier; 2011. p.
237-250.
83. Ghai S, Rajan DK, Benjamin MS, et al. Uterine artery embolization for
leiomyomas: pre- and postprocedural evaluation with US. Radiographics.
2005;25(5):1159-1172.
84. Ahmad I, Ray Jr CE, Conyers C. Transvaginal sonographic appearance of
thrombosed uterine arteries ater uterine artery embolization: the “white
snake” sign. J Clin Ultrasound. 2003;31(8):401-406.
85. Matytsina-Quinlan L, Matytsina L. Submucosal uterine ibroid prolapsed
into vagina in a symptomatic patient with IUS. BMJ Case Rep. 2014;2014.
86. Sato K, Yuasa N, Fujita M, Fukushima Y. Clinical application of difusionweighted
imaging for preoperative diferentiation between uterine leiomyoma
and leiomyosarcoma. Am J Obstet Gynecol. 2014;210(4):368.e1-368.e8.
87. homassin-Naggara I, Dechoux S, Bonneau C, et al. How to diferentiate
benign from malignant myometrial tumours using MR imaging. Eur Radiol.
2013;23(8):2306-2314.
87a. Nagai T, Takai Y, Akahori T, et al. Novel uterine sarcoma preoperative
diagnosis score predicts the need for surgery in patients presenting with a
uterine mass. Springerplus. 2014;3:678.
87b. Goto A, Takeuchi S, Sugimura K, Maruo T. Usefulness of Gd-DTPA
contrast-enhanced dynamic MRI and serum determination of LDH and
its isozymes in the diferential diagnosis of leiomyosarcoma from degenerated
leiomyoma of the uterus. Int J Gynecol Cancer. 2002;12(4):354-361.
88. Zaloudek C, Hendrickson MR. Mesenchymal tumors of the uterus. In:
Kurman RJ, editor. Blaustein’s pathology of the female genital tract. 5th ed.
New York: Springer-Verlag; 2002. p. 561-615.
89. Bergholt T, Eriksen L, Berendt N, et al. Prevalence and risk factors of
adenomyosis at hysterectomy. Hum Reprod. 2001;16(11):2418-2421.
90. Taran FA, Stewart EA, Brucker S. Adenomyosis: epidemiology, risk factors,
clinical phenotype and surgical and interventional alternatives to hysterectomy.
Geburtshilfe Frauenheilkd. 2013;73(9):924-931.
91. Di Donato N, Montanari G, Benfenati A, et al. Prevalence of adenomyosis
in women undergoing surgery for endometriosis. Eur J Obstet Gynecol
Reprod Biol. 2014;181:289-293.
92. Chopra S, Lev-Toaf AS, Ors F, Bergin D. Adenomyosis: common and
uncommon manifestations on sonography and magnetic resonance imaging.
J Ultrasound Med. 2006;25(5):617-627.
93. Meredith SM, Sanchez-Ramos L, Kaunitz AM. Diagnostic accuracy of
transvaginal sonography for the diagnosis of adenomyosis: systematic review
and metaanalysis. Am J Obstet Gynecol. 2009;201(1):107 e1-107.e6.
94. Atri M, Reinhold C, Mehio AR, et al. Adenomyosis: US features with
histologic correlation in an in-vitro study. Radiology. 2000;215(3):
783-790.
95. Bromley B, Shipp TD, Benacerraf B. Adenomyosis: sonographic indings
and diagnostic accuracy. J Ultrasound Med. 2000;19(8):529-534.
96. Kepkep K, Tuncay YA, Goynumer G, Tutal E. Transvaginal sonography in
the diagnosis of adenomyosis: which indings are most accurate? Ultrasound
Obstet Gynecol. 2007;30(3):341-345.
97. Sun YL, Wang CB, Lee CY, et al. Transvaginal sonographic criteria for the
diagnosis of adenomyosis based on histopathologic correlation. Taiwan J
Obstet Gynecol. 2010;49(1):40-44.
98. Reeves MF, Goldstein RB, Jones KD. Communication of adenomyosis with
the endometrial cavity: visualization with saline contrast sonohysterography.
Ultrasound Obstet Gynecol. 2010;36(1):115-119.
99. Takeuchi H, Kitade M, Kikuchi I, et al. Diagnosis, laparoscopic management,
and histopathologic indings of juvenile cystic adenomyoma: a review of
nine cases. Fertil Steril. 2010;94(3):862-868.
100. Acien P, Acien M, Fernandez F, et al. he cavitated accessory uterine mass:
a müllerian anomaly in women with an otherwise normal uterus. Obstet
Gynecol. 2010;116(5):1101-1109.
101. Acien P, Bataller A, Fernandez F, et al. New cases of accessory and cavitated
uterine masses (ACUM): a signiicant cause of severe dysmenorrhea and
recurrent pelvic pain in young women. Hum Reprod. 2012;27(3):
683-694.
102. Taran FA, Weaver AL, Coddington CC, Stewart EA. Characteristics indicating
adenomyosis coexisting with leiomyomas: a case-control study. Hum Reprod.
2010;25(5):1177-1182.
103. Ozkan ZS, Kumbak B, Cilgin H, et al. Coexistence of adenomyosis in women
operated for benign gynecological diseases. Gynecol Endocrinol. 2012;28(3):
212-215.
104. Chu LC, Coquia SF, Hamper UM. Ultrasonography evaluation of pelvic
masses. Radiol Clin North Am. 2014;52(6):1237-1252.
105. Park SB, Moon MH, Hong SR, et al. Adenoma malignum of the uterine
cervix: ultrasonographic indings in 11 patients. Ultrasound Obstet Gynecol.
2011;38(6):716-721.
106. Mendelson EB, Bohm-Velez M, Joseph N, Neiman HL. Endometrial
abnormalities: evaluation with transvaginal sonography. AJR Am J Roentgenol.
1988;150(1):139-142.