Browse > Article
http://dx.doi.org/10.3348/kjr.2018.19.3.397

Pelvic MRI: Is Endovaginal or Rectal Filling Needed?  

Engelaere, Constance (Department of Radiology, Centre Hospitalo-Universitaire de Reims)
Poncelet, Edouard (Department of Radiology, Centre Hospitalier de Valenciennes)
Durot, Carole (Department of Radiology, Centre Hospitalo-Universitaire de Reims)
Dohan, Anthony (Department of Abdominal Imaging, Hopital Lariboisiere-APHP)
Rousset, Pascal (Department of Radiology, Hospices civils de Lyon, Centre hospitalier Lyon-Sud, Universite Claude-Bernard Lyon)
Hoeffel, Christine (Department of Radiology, Centre Hospitalo-Universitaire de Reims)
Publication Information
Korean Journal of Radiology / v.19, no.3, 2018 , pp. 397-409 More about this Journal
Abstract
Magnetic resonance imaging is the optimal modality for pelvic imaging. It is based on T2-weighted magnetic resonance (MR) sequences allowing uterine and vaginal cavity assessment as well as rectal evaluation. Anatomical depiction of these structures may benefit from distension, and conditions either developing inside the lumen of cavities or coming from the outside may then be better delineated and localized. The need for distension, either rectal or vaginal, and the way to conduct it are matters of debate, depending on indication for which the MR examination is being conducted. In this review, we discuss advantages and potential drawbacks of this technique, based on literature and our experience, in the evaluation of various gynecological and rectal diseases.
Keywords
Endoluminal contrast; Magnetic resonace imaging; Pelvic organ prolapse; GU imaging; GI imaging;
Citations & Related Records
연도 인용수 순위
  • Reference
1 Fiaschetti V, Crusco S, Meschini A, Cama V, Di Vito L, Marziali M, et al. Deeply infiltrating endometriosis: evaluation of retro-cervical space on MRI after vaginal opacification. Eur J Radiol 2012;81:3638-3645   DOI
2 Garcia del Salto L, de Miguel Criado J, Aguilera del Hoyo LF, Gutierrez Velasco L, Fraga Rivas P, Manzano Paradela M, et al. MR imaging-based assessment of the female pelvic floor. Radiographics 2014;34:1417-1439   DOI
3 Lienemann A, Anthuber C, Baron A, Kohz P, Reiser M. Dynamic MR colpocystorectography assessing pelvic-floor descent. Eur Radiol 1997;7:1309-1317   DOI
4 Hoeffel C, Mule S, Laurent V, Bouche O, Volet J, Soyer P. Primary rectal cancer local staging. Diagn Interv Imaging 2014;95:485-494   DOI
5 Bazot M, Bharwani N, Huchon C, Kinkel K, Cunha TM, Guerra A, et al. European society of urogenital radiology (ESUR) guidelines: MR imaging of pelvic endometriosis. Eur Radiol 2017;27:2765-2775   DOI
6 Coutinho A Jr, Bittencourt LK, Pires CE, Junqueira F, Lima CM, Coutinho E, et al. MR imaging in deep pelvic endometriosis: a pictorial essay. Radiographics 2011;31:549-567   DOI
7 Reiner CS, Weishaupt D. Dynamic pelvic floor imaging: MRI techniques and imaging parameters. Abdom Imaging 2013;38:903-911   DOI
8 Reiner CS, Tutuian R, Solopova AE, Pohl D, Marincek B, Weishaupt D. MR defecography in patients with dyssynergic defecation: spectrum of imaging findings and diagnostic value. Br J Radiol 2011;84:136-144   DOI
9 Brown MA, Mattrey RF, Stamato S, Sirlin CB. MRI of the female pelvis using vaginal gel. AJR Am J Roentgenol 2005;185:1221-1227   DOI
10 El Sayed RF, Alt CD, Maccioni F, Meissnitzer M, Masselli G, Manganaro L, et al. Magnetic resonance imaging of pelvic floor dysfunction - joint recommendations of the ESUR and ESGAR pelvic floor working group. Eur Radiol 2017;27:2067-2085   DOI
11 Chan YY, Jayaprakasan K, Zamora J, Thornton JG, Raine-Fenning N, Coomarasamy A. The prevalence of congenital uterine anomalies in unselected and high-risk populations: a systematic review. Hum Reprod Update 2011;17:761-771   DOI
12 Troiano RN, McCarthy SM. Mullerian duct anomalies: imaging and clinical issues. Radiology 2004;233:19-34   DOI
13 Takeuchi H, Kuwatsuru R, Kitade M, Sakurai A, Kikuchi I, Shimanuki H, et al. A novel technique using magnetic resonance imaging jelly for evaluation of rectovaginal endometriosis. Fertil Steril 2005;83:442-447   DOI
14 Hetzer FH, Andreisek G, Tsagari C, Sahrbacher U, Weishaupt D. MR defecography in patients with fecal incontinence: imaging findings and their effect on surgical management. Radiology 2006;240:449-457   DOI
15 Yoo RE, Cho JY, Kim SY, Kim SH. A systematic approach to the magnetic resonance imaging-based differential diagnosis of congenital Mullerian duct anomalies and their mimics. Abdom Imaging 2015;40:192-206   DOI
16 Hottat N, Larrousse C, Anaf V, Noel J-C, Matos C, Absil J, et al. Endometriosis: contribution of 3.0-T pelvic MR imaging in preoperative assessment--initial results. Radiology 2009;253:126-134   DOI
17 Griffin N, Grant LA, Sala E. Magnetic resonance imaging of vaginal and vulval pathology. Eur Radiol 2008;18:1269-1280   DOI
18 Kikuchi I, Kuwatsuru R, Yamazaki K, Kumakiri J, Aoki Y, Takeda S. Evaluation of the usefulness of the MRI jelly method for diagnosing complete cul-de-sac obliteration. Biomed Res Int 2014;2014:437962
19 Loubeyre P, Copercini M, Frossard JL, Wenger JM, Petignat P. Pictorial review: rectosigmoid endometriosis on MRI with gel opacification after rectosigmoid colon cleansing. Clin Imaging 2012;36:295-300   DOI
20 Maccioni F. Functional disorders of the ano-rectal compartment of the pelvic floor: clinical and diagnostic value of dynamic MRI. Abdom Imaging 2013;38:930-951   DOI
21 Lienemann A, Fischer T. Functional imaging of the pelvic floor. Eur J Radiol 2003;47:117-122   DOI
22 Bitti GT, Argiolas GM, Ballicu N, Caddeo E, Cecconi M, Demurtas G, et al. Pelvic floor failure: MR imaging evaluation of anatomic and functional abnormalities. Radiographics 2014;34:429-448   DOI
23 Marchiole P, Cittadini G, Sala P, Moioli M, Mathevet P, Capaccio E, et al. Pre- and post-operative work-up in patients affected by early cervical cancer and eligible for fertilitysparing treatment: role of MRI with saline hydrocolpos. Abdom Imaging 2010;35:271-279   DOI
24 Loubeyre P, Petignat P, Jacob S, Egger JF, Dubuisson JB, Wenger JM. Anatomic distribution of posterior deeply infiltrating endometriosis on MRI after vaginal and rectal gel opacification. AJR Am J Roentgenol 2009;192:1625-1631   DOI
25 Maas M, Lambregts DM, Lahaye MJ, Beets GL, Backes W, Vliegen RF, et al. T-staging of rectal cancer: accuracy of 3.0 Tesla MRI compared with 1.5 Tesla. Abdom Imaging 2012;37:475-481   DOI
26 Macario S, Chassang M, Novellas S, Baudin G, Delotte J, Toullalan O, et al. The value of pelvic MRI in the diagnosis of posterior cul-de-sac obliteration in cases of deep pelvic endometriosis. AJR Am J Roentgenol 2012;199:1410-1415   DOI
27 Chassang M, Novellas S, Bloch-Marcotte C, Delotte J, Toullalan O, Bongain A, et al. Utility of vaginal and rectal contrast medium in MRI for the detection of deep pelvic endometriosis. Eur Radiol 2010;20:1003-1010   DOI
28 Novellas S, Marcotte Bloch C, Berthier F, Fournol M, Delotte J, Bongain A, et al. [Anatomy of the female pelvis on MRI: value of intravaginal contrast]. J Radiol 2009;90(7-8 Pt 1):819-824   DOI
29 Bazot M, Gasner A, Lafont C, Ballester M, Darai E. Deep pelvic endometriosis: limited additional diagnostic value of postcontrast in comparison with conventional MR images. Eur J Radiol 2011;80:331-339   DOI
30 Chamie LP, Blasbalg R, Pereira RM, Warmbrand G, Serafini PC. Findings of pelvic endometriosis at transvaginal US, MR imaging, and laparoscopy. Radiographics 2011;31:77-100   DOI
31 Khatri G, Bailey AA, Bacsu C, Christie AL, Kumar N, Pedrosa I, et al. Influence of rectal gel volume on defecation during dynamic pelvic floor magnetic resonance imaging. Clin Imaging 2015;39:1027-1031   DOI
32 Francesca M, Najwa AA, Valeria B, Fabrizio M, Marileda I, Massimo M, et al. Prospective comparison between two different magnetic resonance defecography techniques for evaluating pelvic floor disorders: air-balloon versus gel for rectal filling. Eur Radiol 2016;26:1783-1791   DOI
33 Young P, Daniel B, Sommer G, Kim B, Herfkens R. Intravaginal gel for staging of female pelvic cancers--preliminary report of safety, distention, and gel-mucosal contrast during magnetic resonance examination. J Comput Assist Tomogr 2012;36:253-256   DOI
34 Colaiacomo MC, Masselli G, Polettini E, Lanciotti S, Casciani E, Bertini L, et al. Dynamic MR imaging of the pelvic floor: a pictorial review. Radiographics 2009;29:e35   DOI
35 Beets-Tan RG, Lambregts DM, Maas M, Bipat S, Barbaro B, Caseiro-Alves F, et al. Magnetic resonance imaging for the clinical management of rectal cancer patients: recommendations from the 2012 European Society of Gastrointestinal and Abdominal Radiology (ESGAR) consensus meeting. Eur Radiol 2013;23:2522-2531   DOI
36 Slater A, Halligan S, Taylor SA, Marshall M. Distance between the rectal wall and mesorectal fascia measured by MRI: effect of rectal distension and implications for preoperative prediction of a tumour-free circumferential resection margin. Clin Radiol 2006;61:65-70   DOI
37 Balleyguier C, Sala E, Da Cunha T, Bergman A, Brkljacic B, Danza F, et al. Staging of uterine cervical cancer with MRI: guidelines of the European Society of Urogenital Radiology. Eur Radiol 2011;21:1102-1110   DOI
38 Akata D, Kerimoglu U, Hazirolan T, Karcaaltincaba M, Kose F, Ozmen MN, et al. Efficacy of transvaginal contrast-enhanced MRI in the early staging of cervical carcinoma. Eur Radiol 2005;15:1727-1733   DOI
39 Mondot L, Novellas S, Senni M, Piche T, Dausse F, Caramella T, et al. Pelvic prolapse: static and dynamic MRI. Abdom Imaging 2007;32:775-783   DOI
40 Ye F, Zhang H, Liang X, Ouyang H, Zhao X, Zhou C. Journal club: preoperative MRI evaluation of primary rectal cancer: intrasubject comparison with and without rectal distention. AJR Am J Roentgenol 2016;207:32-39   DOI