About
The Journal "Obstetrics and Gynecology"Journal HistoryAims and ScopePolicies on Conflict of Interest, Human and Animal Rights, and Informed ConsentEditorial ProcessData sharing statementAdvertising PolicyThe Process for Handling Cases Requiring Corrections, Retractions, and Editorial Expressions of ConcernEditorial BoardEditorial CounsilInformation for ProfessionalsNewsContacts
ArchiveEthical StandardsSubscription
For authors
InstructionsInformed consent policyContract offerEASE GuidelinesICJME CriteriaWAME Recommendations on ChatGPT and Chatbots in Relation to Scholarly Publications
Reviewing
About
The Journal "Obstetrics and Gynecology"Journal HistoryAims and ScopePolicies on Conflict of Interest, Human and Animal Rights, and Informed ConsentEditorial ProcessData sharing statementAdvertising PolicyThe Process for Handling Cases Requiring Corrections, Retractions, and Editorial Expressions of ConcernEditorial BoardEditorial CounsilInformation for ProfessionalsNewsContacts
ArchiveEthical StandardsSubscription
For authors
InstructionsInformed consent policyContract offerEASE GuidelinesICJME CriteriaWAME Recommendations on ChatGPT and Chatbots in Relation to Scholarly Publications
Reviewing
Logout
Obstetrics and Gynegology2021№7
Magnetic resonance imaging in the...

Magnetic resonance imaging in the differential diagnosis of female genital malformations

DOI
https://dx.doi.org/10.18565/aig.2021.7.61-73

Syrkashev E.M., Arakelyan A.S., Bychenko V.G., Luzhina I.A., Adamyan L.V.

Academician V.I. Kulakov National Medical Research Center of Obstetrics, Gynecology, and Perinatology, Ministry of Health of Russia, Moscow, Russia
The development of the female reproductive system consists of several stages of transformation of the paramesonephric (Müllerian) ducts. Embryonic developmental defects at any stage can lead to various anomalies that correspond to this period of embryogenesis. Early diagnosis of congenital anomalies of the female reproductive system in the prepubertal period can prevent clinical symptoms and possible serious complications. Ultrasound is a main method for diagnosing female reproductive malformations; however, even after their preliminary diagnosis has been established, further examination is frequently required to accurately determine the type of congenital anomaly for planning a possible surgical intervention. Magnetic resonance imaging (MRI) is the method of choice in the diagnosis of this type of pathology, making it possible not only to visualize the type of the defect accurately, but also the presence of concomitant pathology, including that during the obvious adhesive process and in pediatric patients.
Conclusion. The findings should be analyzed in conjunction with clinical data and other diagnostic methods, allowing the full determination of management tactics for this patient group.

Keywords

female genital malformations
MRI
Full text (in Russian)

References

  1. Фархат К.Н., Адамян Л.В. Аномалии развития матки и влагалища в сочетании с эндометриозом: тактика ведения и хирургическая коррекция. Акушерство и гинекология. 2016; 5: 96-102. [Farkhat K.N., Adamyan L.V. Uterine and vaginal malformations concurrent with endometriosis: Management tactics and surgical correction. Akusherstvo i ginekologiya/Obstetrics and Gynecology. 2016; 5: 96-102. (in Russian)]. https://dx.doi.org/10.18565/aig.2016.5.96-102.
  2. Saravelos S.H., Cocksedge K.A., Li T.C. Prevalence and diagnosis of congenital uterine anomalies in women with reproductive failure: a critical appraisal. Hum. Reprod. Update. 2008; 14(5): 415-29. https://dx.doi.org/10.1093/humupd/dmn018.
  3. Chan Y.Y., Jayaprakasan K., Zamora J., Thornton J.G., Raine-Fenning N., Coomarasamy A. The prevalence of congenital uterine anomalies in unselected and high-risk populations: a systematic review. Hum. Reprod. Update. 2011;17(6): 761-71. https://dx.doi.org/10.1093/humupd/dmr028.
  4. Кулаков В.И., Савельева Г.М., Манухина И.Б., ред. Гинекология. Национальное руководство. М.: ГЭОТАР-Медиа; 2009. [Kulakov V.I., Savel'eva G.M., Manuhina I.B. Ginekologiya. Gynecology. National Guide. M.: GEOTAR-Media; 2009. (in Russian)].
  5. Junqueira B.L., Allen L.M., Spitzer R.F., Lucco K.L., Babyn P.S., Doria A.S. Müllerian duct anomalies and mimics in children and adolescents: correlative intraoperative assessment with clinical imaging. Radiographics. 2009; 29(4):1085-103. https://dx.doi.org/10.1148/rg.294085737.
  6. Рогожин В.А. МРТ в гинекологической практике. Российский электронный журнал лучевой диагностики. 2012; 2(3): 27-40. [Rogozhin V.A. MRI in gynecological practice. Russian Electronic Journal of Radiation Diagnostics. 2012; 2(3): 27-40. (in Russian)].
  7. Grimbizis G.F., Gordts S., Di Spiezio S.A., Brucker S., De Angelis C., Gergolet M. et al. The ESHRE-ESGE consensus on the classification of female genital tract congenital anomalies. Gynecol. Surg. 2013; 10(3): 199-212. https://dx.doi.org/10.1007/s10397-013-0800-x.
  8. O'Neill M.J., Yoder I.C., Connolly S.A., Mueller P.R. Imaging evaluation and classification of developmental anomalies of the female reproductive system with an emphasis on MR imaging. Am. J. Roentgenol. 1999; 173(2): 407-16. https://dx.doi.org/10.2214/ajr.173.2.10430146.
  9. Choussein S., Nasioudis D., Schizas D., Economopoulos K.P. Mullerian dysgenesis: a critical review of the literature. Arch. Gynecol. Obstet. 2017; 295(6): 1369-81. https://dx.doi.org/10.1007/s00404-017-4372-2.
  10. Yoo R.E., Cho J.Y., Kim S.Y., Kim S.H. A systematic approach to the magnetic resonance imaging-based differential diagnosis of congenital Müllerian duct anomalies and their mimics. Abdom. Imaging. 2015; 40(1): 192-206. https://dx.doi.org/10.1007/s00261-014-0195-9.
  11. Troiano R.N., McCarthy S.M. Mullerian duct anomalies: imaging and clinical issues. Radiology. 2004; 233(1): 19-34. https://dx.doi.org/10.1148/radiol.2331020777.
  12. Marcal L., Nothaft M.A., Coelho F., Volpato R., Iyer R. Mullerian duct anomalies: MR imaging. Abdom. Imaging. 2011; 36(6): 756-64. https://dx.doi.org/10.1007/s00261-010-9681-x.
  13. Behr S.C., Courtier J.L., Qayyum A. Imaging of müllerian duct anomalies. Radiographics. 2012; 32(6): E233-50. https://dx.doi.org/10.1148/rg.326125515.
  14. Propst A.M., Hill J.A. Anatomic factors associated with recurrent pregnancy loss. Semin. Reprod. Med. 2000; 18(4): 341-50. https://dx.doi.org/10.1055/s-2000-13723.
  15. Siegelman E.S., Outwater E.K., Banner M.P., Ramchandani P., Anderson T.L., Schnall M.D. High-resolution MR imaging of the vagina. Radiographics. 1997; 17(5): 1183-203. https://doi.org/10.1148/radiographics.17.5.9308110.
  16. Haddad B., Louis-Sylvestre C., Poitout P., Paniel B.J. Longitudinal vaginal septum: a retrospective study of 202 cases. Eur. J. Obstet. Gynecol. Reprod. Biol. 1997; 74(2): 197-9. https://dx.doi.org/10.1016/s0301-2115(97)00105-x.
  17. Allen J.W., Cardall S., Kittijarukhajorn M., Siegel C.L. Incidence of ovarian maldescent in women with mullerian duct anomalies: evaluation by MRI. Am. J. Roentgenol. 2012; 198(4): W381-5. https://dx.doi.org/10.2214/AJR.11.6595.
  18. Homer H.A., Li T.C., Cooke I.D. The septate uterus: a review of management and reproductive outcome. Fertil. Steril. 2000; 73(1): 1-14. https://dx.doi.org/10.1016/s0015-0282(99)00480-x.
  19. Макиян З.Н., Адамян Л.В., Быченко В.Г., Мирошникова Н.А., Козлова А.В. Функциональная магнитно-резонансная томография для определения кровотока при симметричных аномалиях матки. Акушерство и гинекология. 2016; 10: 73-9. [Makiyan Z.N., Adamyan L.V., Bychenko V.G., Miroshnikova N.A., Kozlova A.V. Functional magnetic resonance imaging to determine blood flow in symmetrical uterine abnormalities. Akusherstvo i ginekologiya/ Obstetrics and Gynecology. 2016; 10: 73-9. (in Russian)]. https://dx.doi.org/10.18565/aig.2016.10.73-9.
  20. Nakhal R.S., Hall-Craggs M., Freeman A., Kirkham A., Conway G.S., Arora R. et al. Evaluation of retained testes in adolescent girls and women with complete androgen insensitivity syndrome. Radiology. 2013; 268(1): 153-60. https://dx.doi.org/10.1148/radiol.13121068.
  21. Hughes I.A., Deeb A. Androgen resistance. Best Pract. Res. Clin. Endocrinol. Metab. 2006; 20(4): 577-98. https://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.beem.2006.11.003.
  22. Fiaschetti V., Taglieri A., Gisone V., Coco I., Simonetti G. Mayer-Rokitansky-Kuster-Hauser syndrome diagnosed by magnetic resonance imaging. Role of imaging to identify and evaluate the uncommon variation in development of the female genital tract. J. Radiol. Case Rep. 2012; 6(4): 17-24. https://dx.doi.org/10.3941/jrcr.v6i4.992.
  23. Cools M., Drop S.L., Wolffenbuttel K.P., Oosterhuis J.W., Looijenga L.H. Germ cell tumors in the intersex gonad: old paths, new directions, moving frontiers. Endocr. Rev. 2006; 27(5): 468-84. https://dx.doi.org/10.1210/er.2006-0005.
  24. Deans R., Creighton S.M., Liao L.M., Conway G.S. Timing of gonadectomy in adult women with complete androgen insensitivity syndrome (CAIS): patient preferences and clinical evidence. Clin. Endocrinol. 2012; 76(6): 894-8. https://dx.doi.org/10.1111/j.1365-2265.2012.04330.x.
  25. Imaoka I., Wada A., Matsuo M., Yoshida M., Kitagaki H., Sugimura K. MR imaging of disorders associated with female infertility: use in diagnosis, treatment, and management. Radiographics. 2003; 23(6): 1401-21. https://dx.doi.org/10.1148/rg.236025115.
  26. Fedele L., Bianchi S., Di Nola G., Franchi D., Candiani G.B. Endometriosis and nonobstructive müllerian anomalies. Obstet. Gynecol. 1992; 79(4): 515-7.
  27. Zhang H., Qu H., Ning G., Cheng B., Jia F., Li X., Chen X. MRI in the evaluation of obstructive reproductive tract anomalies in paediatric patients. Clin. Radiol. 2017; 72(7): 612. e7-612. e15. https://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.crad.2017.02.002.
  28. Burgis J. Obstructive Müllerian anomalies: case report, diagnosis, and management. Am. J. Obstet. Gynecol. 2001; 185(2): 338-44. https://dx.doi.org/10.1067/mob.2001.116738.

Received 21.06.2021

Accepted 22.06.2021

About the Authors

Egor M. Syrkashev, M.D., Researcher of the Radiology Department, Academician V.I. Kulakov National Medical Research Center for Obstetrics, Gynecology and Perinatology, Ministry of Healthcare of Russian Federation. E-mail: e_syrkashev@oparina4.ru. ORCID: 0000-0003-4043-907X. 119997, Russia, Moscow, Ac. Oparina str., 4.
Alek S. Arakelyan, PhD, Senior Researcher of the Gynecological Department, Academician V.I. Kulakov National Medical Research Center for Obstetrics, Gynecology and Perinatology, Ministry of Healthcare of Russian Federation. Tel.: +7(916)376-78-98. E-mail: arakelyanac@mail.ru. ORCID: 0000-0002-3217-1141.
119997, Russia, Moscow, Ac. Oparina str., 4.
Vladimir G. Bychenko, PhD, Head of the Department of Radiation Diagnostics, Academician V.I. Kulakov National Medical Research Center for Obstetrics, Gynecology and Perinatology, Ministry of Healthcare of Russian Federation. Tel.: +7(495)438-23-11. E-mail: v_bychenko@oparina4.ru. ORCID: 0000-0002-1459-4124.
119997, Russia, Moscow, Ac. Oparina str., 4.
Irina A. Luzhina, Radiologist of the Department of Radiation Diagnostics, Academician V.I. Kulakov National Medical Research Center for Obstetrics, Gynecology and Perinatology, Ministry of Healthcare of Russian Federation. ORCID: 0000-0002-7985-5735. 119997, Russia, Moscow, Ac. Oparina str., 4.
Leila V. Adamyan, Academician of RAS, MD, PhD, Professor RAS, Honored Master of Science of the Russian Federation, Head Specialist in Gynecology of Ministry of Healthcare of Russia, Head of the Department of Surgical Gynecology, Academician V.I. Kulakov National Medical Research Center for Obstetrics, Gynecology and Perinatology, Ministry of Healthcare of Russian Federation; Head of the Department of Reproductive Medicine and Surgery, Faculty of Postgraduate Education,
A.I. Yevdokimov Moscow State University of Medicine and Dentistry. Tel.: +7(495)438-40-68. E-mail: adamyanleila@gmail.com. ORCID: 0000-0002-3253-4512.
119997, Russia, Moscow, Ac. Oparina str., 4.

For citation: Syrkashev E.M., Arakelyan A.S., Bychenko V.G., Luzhina I.A., Adamyan L.V. Magnetic resonance imaging in the differential diagnosis of female genital malformations.
Akusherstvo i Ginekologiya/Obstetrics and Gynecology. 2021; 7: 61-73 (in Russian)
https://dx.doi.org/10.18565/aig.2021.7.61-73

Similar Articles

№6 / 2018
Almova I.K., Khilkevich E.G., Chuprynin V.D., Tikhomirova A.A., Asaturova A.V., Chursin V.V.
Clinical and diagnostic features of retrocervical endometriosis
№9 / 2020
Nosova Yu.V., Solopova A.E., Asaturova A.V., Tregubova A.V., Kometova V.V., Khabas G.N.
The role of intraoperative frozen section analysis in the choice of surgical strategy for ovarian tumors
№1 / 2018
Vinitsky A.A., Kulabukhova E.A., Bychenko V.G., Shmakov R.G., Ezhova L.S., Uchevatkina P.V., Pirogova M.M.
Prognostic significance of MRI in diagnosing different types of placenta increta
№9 / 2019
Nosova Yu.V., Solopova A.E., Khabas G.N.
Current trends in screening and differential diagnosis of epithelial ovarian tumors
№8 / 2022
Solopova A.E., Ukraintsev N.I., Rubtsova N.A.
Magnetic resonance imaging in the initial staging of cervical cancer: updating the 2021 ESUR guidelines
By continuing to use our site, you consent to the processing of cookies that ensure the proper functioning of the site.