ACR Appropriateness Criteria® Infertility

Hysterosalpingography using Magnetic Resonance Imaging for infertility patients

OBJECTIVE

Some studies have shown that it is possible to evaluate tubal permeability through MRI. Our aim is to perform a prospective study and to perform a comprehensive review in the literature regarding HSG-MRI.

METHODS

We carried out a PUBMED search using the following keywords: hysterosalpingogram, hysterosalpingography, magnetic resonance imaging and MRI. As inclusion criteria, we included only papers published in English, and exams ran on humans. We also conducted a prospective inclusion of patients who had visited a human reproduction clinic between May/2017 and April/2019 for laboratory image diagnoses using HSG-MRI.

RESULTS

Following the inclusion and exclusion criteria, we included seven original papers. Review papers and those written in a language other than English, were excluded. Between the period of May/2017 and April/2019, we selected ten patients for our study. The average exam duration was 30 minutes. Cervical catheterization was possible in all cases. There were no major complications. We highlight that in 8/9 of patients, we could directly visualize uterine tubes with contrast (excluding one patient with bilateral tubal ligation).

CONCLUSIONS

Our initial experience with HSG-MRI shows promise. We demonstrated an optimized protocol for conducting an HSG-MRI (with excellent image quality). HSG-MRI had some advantages, such as not using ionized radiation, less pain and being able to analyze pelvic anatomy. Patients referred for a pelvic MRI as part of a more detailed investigation into infertility can also benefit from undergoing a simultaneous HSG using MRI.

Differentiation Between Phenotypes of Polycystic Ovarian Syndrome With Sonography

Objectives:

To differentiate between the classic (A/B) from the nonclassic (C/D) phenotypes of the polycystic ovarian syndrome (PCOS) with sonography.

Materials & Methods:

Retrospective analysis was performed upon 72 female patients with PCOS. All patients underwent transvaginal sonography. The patients were classified into classic and nonclassic phenotypes of PCOS. Image analysis was performed for the ovarian volume, follicle counts, follicle size, and endometrial plate thickness.

Results:

There were significant differences in the ovarian volume ( P = .001), follicle counts ( P = .001), follicle size ( P = .001), and endometrial plate thickness ( P = .001) between classic and nonclassic phenotypes of PCOS. The threshold value for ovarian volume, follicle count, follicle size, and endometrial plate thickness used to differentiate classic from nonclassic phenotypes were 12.5, 10.5, 5.25, and 5.75, respectively, with an area under the curve of 0.79, 0.82, 0.83, 0.77 and an accuracy of 75%, 73.6%, 79.2%, and 68.1%, respectively. The serum testosterone level and the body mass index were significantly higher in patients with classic than nonclassic phenotypes of PCOS ( P = .001, .04), respectively.

Conclusion:

Sonography findings can differentiate classic from nonclassic phenotypes of PCOS.

Endometriosis is a chronic systemic disease: clinical challenges and novel innovations

Endometriosis is a common disease affecting 5-10% of women of reproductive age globally. However, despite its prevalence, diagnosis is typically delayed by years, misdiagnosis is common, and delivery of effective therapy is prolonged. Identification and prompt treatment of endometriosis are essential and facilitated by accurate clinical diagnosis. Endometriosis is classically defined as a chronic, gynaecological disease characterised by endometrial-like tissue present outside of the uterus and is thought to arise by retrograde menstruation. However, this description is outdated and no longer reflects the true scope and manifestations of the disease. The clinical presentation is varied, the presence of pelvic lesions is heterogeneous, and the manifestations of the disease outside of the female reproductive tract remain poorly understood. Endometriosis is now considered a systemic disease rather than a disease predominantly affecting the pelvis. Endometriosis affects metabolism in liver and adipose tissue, leads to systemic inflammation, and alters gene expression in the brain that causes pain sensitisation and mood disorders. The full effect of the disease is not fully recognised and goes far beyond the pelvis. Recognition of the full scope of the disease will facilitate clinical diagnosis and allow for more comprehensive treatment than currently available. Progestins and low-dose oral contraceptives are unsuccessful in a third of symptomatic women globally, probably as a result of progesterone resistance. Oral gonadotropin-releasing hormone (GnRH) antagonists constitute an effective and tolerable therapeutic alternative when first-line medications do not work. The development of GnRH antagonists has resulted in oral drugs that have fewer side-effects than other therapies and has allowed for rapid movement between treatments to optimise and personalise endometriosis care. In this Review, we discuss the latest understanding of endometriosis as a systemic disease with multiple manifestations outside the parameters of classic gynaecological disease.

Niche role of MRI in the evaluation of female infertility

Infertility is a major social and clinical problem affecting 13-15% of couples worldwide. The pelvic causes of female infertility are categorized as ovarian disorders, tubal, peritubal disorders, and uterine disorders. Appropriate selection of an imaging modality is essential to accurately diagnose the aetiology of infertlity, since the imaging diagnosis directs the appropriate treatment to be instituted. Imaging evaluation begins with hystero- salpingography (HSG), to evaluate fallopian tube patency. Uterine filling defects and contour abnormalities may be discovered at HSG but usually require further characterization with pelvic ultrasound (US), sono-hysterography (syn: hystero-sonography/saline infusion sonography) or pelvic magnetic resonance imaging (MRI), when US remains inconclusive. The major limitation of hysterographic US, is its inability to visualize extraluminal pathologies, which are better evaluated by pelvic US and MRI. Although pelvic US is a valuable modality in diagnosing entities comprising the garden variety, however, extensive pelvic inflammatory disease, complex tubo-ovarian pathologies, deep-seated endometriosis deposits with its related complications, Mulllerian duct anomalies, uterine synechiae and adenomyosis, often remain unresolved by both transabdominal and transvaginal US. Thus, MRI comes to the rescue and has a niche role in resolving complex adnexal masses, endometriosis, and Mullerian duct anomalies with greater ease. This is a review, based on the authors' experience at tertiary care teaching hospitals and aims to provide an imaging approach towards the abnormalities which are not definitively diagnosed by ultrasound alone.

The actionable imaging report

The goal of a diagnostic imaging examination is to provide the referring provider with an actionable imaging report that can be used to impart information to determine optimal clinical management for the patient. An actionable imaging report not only conveys the findings of the examination accurately, but does so in a timely and safe manner for an imaging examination that was performed appropriately and using the correct technique. The use of information technology tools has been paramount in improving the value of the imaging report and continues to play a prominent role in this process. The diversity of abdominal imaging, in both the variety of imaging modalities available and the organ systems evaluated, makes it well-suited to adopt these information technology solutions to improve report quality, including increased consistency in reports and in follow-up recommendations. This review discusses the components of the imaging chain involved in optimizing the imaging report with specific emphasis on the role of information technology applications to address the challenges that are frequently encountered. Specific abdominal imaging examples are presented to provide practical guidance and clinical context.

Comparison of uterine and tubal pathology identified by transvaginal sonography, hysterosalpingography, and hysteroscopy in female patients with infertility

Background

The causes of female infertility are multifactorial and necessitate comprehensive evaluation including physical examination, hormonal testing, and imaging. Given the associated psychological and financial stress that imaging can cause, infertility patients benefit from a structured and streamlined evaluation. The goal of such a work up is to evaluate the uterus, endometrium, and fallopian tubes for anomalies or abnormalities potentially preventing normal conception. To date, the standard method for assessing these structures typically involves some combination of transvaginal sonography (TVS), hysterosalpingography (HSG), and hysteroscopy (HSC). The goal of this review is to compare the diagnostic accuracy of TVS, HSG, and HSC for diagnosing abnormalities in infertility patients to determine if all studies are necessary for pre-treatment evaluation.

Results

We identified infertility patients prior to initiation of assisted reproductive technology who had baseline TVS, HSG, and HSC within 180 days of each other. From medical record review, we compared frequencies of each finding between modalities. Of the 1274 patients who received a baseline TVS over 2 years, 327 had TVS and HSG within 180 days and 55 patients had TVS, HSG and HSC. Of the 327, TVS detected fibroids more often than HSG (74 vs. 5, p < .0001), and adenomyosis more often than HSG (7 vs. 2, p = .02). HSG detected tubal obstruction more often than TVS (56 vs. 8, p = .002). Four (1.2 %) patients had endometrial polyps on both HSG and TVS.

In the 55 patients with HSG, TVS, and HSC, HSC identified endometrial polyps more often than TVS (10 vs. 1, p = .0001) and HSG (10 vs. 2, p = .0007). TVS detected more fibroids than HSC (17 vs. 5, p < .0001). Tubal obstruction was identified more often by HSG than HSC (19 vs. 5, p < .0001).

Conclusions

TVS is superior for evaluation of myometrial pathology. HSG is superior for evaluation of tubal pathologies. Endometrial pathologies are best identified with HSC.