Imaging for Adenomyosis: Making the Diagnosis by Sonography

Different subtypes of ultrasound-diagnosed adenomyosis and in vitro fertilization outcomes: A systematic review and meta-analysis

INTRODUCTION

Adenomyosis prevalence among women with infertility is increasing; their management during in vitro fertilization is usually based on ultrasound diagnosis alone. Herein, we summarize the latest evidence on the impact of ultrasound-diagnosed adenomyosis on in vitro fertilization outcomes.

MATERIAL AND METHODS

The study was registered with The International Prospective Register of Systematic Reviews (CRD42022355584). We searched PubMed, Embase, and Cochrane Library databases from inception to January 31, 2023, for cohort studies on the impact of adenomyosis on in vitro fertilization outcomes. Fertility outcomes were compared according to the presence of adenomyosis as diagnosed by ultrasound, concurrent endometriosis and adenomyosis, and MRI-based or MRI- and ultrasound-based adenomyosis diagnosis. Live birth rate was the primary outcome while clinical pregnancy and miscarriage rates were secondary outcomes.

RESULTS

Women diagnosed with adenomyosis by ultrasound had lower live birth (odds ratio [OR] = 0.66; 95% confidence interval [CI]: 0.53-0.82, grade: very low), lower clinical pregnancy (OR = 0.64; 95% CI: 0.53-0.77, grade: very low), and higher miscarriage (OR = 1.81; 95% CI: 1.35-2.44, grade: very low) rates than those without adenomyosis. Notably, symptomatic and diffuse, but not asymptomatic adenomyosis as diagnosed by ultrasound, adversely affected in vitro fertilization outcomes, with lower live birth (OR = 0.57; 95% CI: 0.34-0.96, grade: very low), clinical pregnancy (OR = 0.69; 95% CI: 0.57-0.85, grade: low), and miscarriage (OR = 2.48, 95% CI: 1.28-4.82, grade: low) rates; and lower live birth (OR = 0.37; 95% CI: 0.23-0.59, grade: low) and clinical pregnancy (OR = 0.50; 95% CI: 0.34-0.75, grade: low), but not miscarriage rate (OR = 2.18; 95% CI: 0.72-6.62, grade: very low), respectively. Concurrent adenomyosis in endometriosis is associated with a significantly lower live birth rate (OR = 0.44; 95% CI: 0.26-0.75, grade: low) than endometriosis alone. Finally, the use of MRI-based or MRI- and ultrasound-based adenomyosis diagnosis showed no significant association with in vitro fertilization outcomes (grade: very low for all outcomes).

CONCLUSIONS

Considering ultrasound findings, symptoms, and different subtypes of adenomyosis may aid in offering personalized counseling, improving treatment decisions, and achieving better outcomes of in vitro fertilization.

Sonographic Assessment of Uterine Biometry for the Diagnosis of Diffuse Adenomyosis in a Tertiary Outpatient Clinic

Background: to compare several uterine biometric parameters at transvaginal ultrasound (TVUS) between adenomyosis and non-adenomyosis uteri and evaluate their role for the diagnosis of diffuse adenomyosis. Methods: prospective observational study conducted between the 1 February 2022 and the 30 April 2022. In this case, 56 patients with TVUS diagnosis of adenomyosis were included. A 1:1 ratio age and parity-matched group of non-adenomyosis patients was selected. We compared sonographic uterine biometric parameters (longitudinal (LD), anteroposterior (APD) and transverse (TD) diameters, volume, simple and complex diameter ratios) and investigated their diagnostic performance. Results: all sonographic parameters were significantly different between the study groups, except for TD/(LD+APD). Optimal cut-off values of APD and LD/APD showed the best sensitivity and specificity. APD diameter equal or superior to 39.5 mm (95% CI, 36.2–42.8) had sensitivity of 0.70 (95% CI, 0.57–0.80), specificity of 0.71 (95% CI, 0.59–0.82) and accuracy of 0.75 (95% CI, 0.66–0.84). LD/APD equal or inferior to 2.05 (95% CI, 1.96–2.13) showed sensitivity and specificity of 0.70 (95% CI, 0.57–0.80) each and accuracy of 0.72 (95% CI, 0.62–0.81). Conclusions: several biometric uterine parameters at TVUS in fertile-aged women were statistically different between adenomyosis and non-adenomyosis uteri, though their optimal cut-off values showed low accuracy in diagnosing adenomyosis.

Consensus on revised definitions of Morphological Uterus Sonographic Assessment (MUSA) features of adenomyosis: results of modified Delphi procedure

OBJECTIVES

To evaluate whether the Morphological Uterus Sonographic Assessment (MUSA) features of adenomyosis need to be better defined and, if deemed necessary, to reach consensus on the updated definitions.

METHODS

A modified Delphi procedure was performed among European gynecologists with expertise in ultrasound diagnosis of adenomyosis. To identify MUSA features that might need revision, 15 two-dimensional (2D) video recordings (four recordings also included three-dimensional (3D) still images) of transvaginal ultrasound (TVS) examinations of the uterus were presented in the first Delphi round (online questionnaire). Experts were asked to confirm or refute the presence of each of the nine MUSA features of adenomyosis (described in the original MUSA consensus statement) in each of the 15 videoclips and to provide comments. In the second Delphi round (online questionnaire), the results of the first round and suggestions for revision of MUSA features were shared with the experts before they were asked to assess a new set of 2D and 3D still images of TVS examinations and to provide feedback on the proposed revisions. A third Delphi round (virtual group meeting) was conducted to discuss and reach final consensus on revised definitions of MUSA features. Consensus was predefined as at least 66.7% agreement between experts.

RESULTS

Of 18 invited experts, 16 agreed to participate in the Delphi procedure. Eleven experts completed and four experts partly finished the first round. The experts identified a need for more detailed definitions of some MUSA features. They recommended use of 3D ultrasound to optimize visualization of the junctional zone. Fifteen experts participated in the second round and reached consensus on the presence or absence of ultrasound features of adenomyosis in most of the still images. Consensus was reached for all revised definitions except those for subendometrial lines and buds and interrupted junctional zone. Thirteen experts joined the online meeting, in which they discussed and agreed on final revisions of the MUSA definitions. There was consensus on the need to distinguish between direct features of adenomyosis, i.e. features indicating presence of ectopic endometrial tissue in the myometrium, and indirect features, i.e. features reflecting changes in the myometrium secondary to presence of endometrial tissue in the myometrium. Myometrial cysts, hyperechogenic islands and echogenic subendometrial lines and buds were classified unanimously as direct features of adenomyosis. Globular uterus, asymmetrical myometrial thickening, fan-shaped shadowing, translesional vascularity, irregular junctional zone and interrupted junctional zone were classified as indirect features of adenomyosis.

CONCLUSION

Consensus between gynecologists with expertise in ultrasound diagnosis of adenomyosis was achieved regarding revised definitions of the MUSA features of adenomyosis and on the classification of MUSA features as direct or indirect signs of adenomyosis. © 2021 The Authors. Ultrasound in Obstetrics & Gynecology published by John Wiley & Sons Ltd on behalf of International Society of Ultrasound in Obstetrics and Gynecology.

Sonographic Signs of Adenomyosis in Women with Endometriosis Are Associated with Infertility

We compared the prevalence of ultrasound signs of adenomyosis in women with endometriosis who underwent surgery to those who were managed conservatively. This was a retrospective study of women evaluated at a tertiary endometriosis referral center who underwent 2D/3D transvaginal ultrasound. Adenomyosis diagnosis was based on the presence of at least three sonographic signs. The study group subsequently underwent laparoscopic surgery while the control group continued conservative management. Statistical analysis compared the two groups for demographics, symptoms, clinical data, and sonographic findings. The study and control groups included 244 and 158 women, respectively. The presence of any, 3+, or 5+ sonographic signs of adenomyosis was significantly more prevalent in the study group (OR = 1.93–2.7, p < 0.004, 95% CI; 1.24–4.09). After controlling for age, for all findings but linear striations, the OR for having a specific feature was higher in the study group. Women in the study group with ≥ 5 sonographic signs of adenomyosis had more than twice the risk of experiencing infertility (OR = 2.31, p = 0.012, 95% CI; 1.20–4.45). Sonographic signs of adenomyosis are more prevalent in women with symptomatic endometriosis who underwent surgery compared with those who continued conservative management. Women with 5+ findings have a significantly increased risk of infertility. Adenomyosis on ultrasound should be considered in the management decisions regarding these patients.

90 YEARS OF PROGESTERONE: Selective progesterone receptor modulators in gynaecological therapies

Abnormal uterine bleeding (AUB) is a chronic, debilitating and common condition affecting one in four women of reproductive age. Current treatments (conservative, medical and surgical) may be unsuitable, poorly tolerated or may result in loss of fertility. Selective progesterone receptor modulators (SPRMs) influence progesterone-regulated pathways, a hormone critical to female reproductive health and disease; therefore, SPRMs hold great potential in fulfilling an unmet need in managing gynaecological disorders. SPRMs in current clinical use include RU486 (mifepristone), which is licensed for pregnancy interruption, and CDB-2914 (ulipristal acetate), licensed for managing AUB in women with leiomyomas and in a higher dose as an emergency contraceptive. In this article, we explore the clinical journey of SPRMs and the need for further interrogation of this class of drugs with the ultimate goal of improving women's quality of life.