MR imaging is becoming increasingly important in the assessment of patients with endometriosis. Its multiplanar capabilities and superior soft tissue contrast are particularly useful in the detection of deep infiltrating endometriotic implants. Endometriosis, defined as the presence of endometrial glands and stroma outside the endometrium, is among the most common gynaecological disorders affecting women in their reproductive age. The diagnosis and evaluation of the extension of endometriosis are difficult only with physical examination and laparoscopy. According to the authors' personal experience, a special MRI technique and some imaging guidelines regarding different anatomical localizations of endometriosis are discussed. This review is a brief presentation of current evidence on the diagnostic accuracy of MRI in the evaluation of endometriosis concerning other diagnostic methods, the limitations of MRI and its essential usefulness for preoperative diagnosis of deep pelvic endometriosis, and future perspectives in monitoring this disease.

Gestational hypertension is a recognized risk factor for the development of complications during pregnancy. The present study retrospectively assessed the respective values of blood pressure components derived from conventional and 24-h recordings (ABPM) as predictors of premature delivery in women with gestational hypertension based on office readings from 26th week of gestation onwards. Blood pressures were measured conventionally and over 24 h. Standard medical and obstetric history, and standard laboratory work-up were taken into account. The mean (+/- standard deviation, SD) age of 123 women was 29 +/- 6 years. Current pregnancy was, on average, the second. The conventional systolic (SBP)/diastolic (DBP) blood pressure averaged 140 +/- 19/92 +/- 14 mmHg, and pulse pressure (PP) and mean arterial pressure (MBP) averaged 48 +/- 10 and 108 +/- 15 mmHg. The corresponding values derived from ABPM were 135 +/- 16/90 +/- 11, 47 +/- 9 and 105 +/- 12 mmHg. The 24-h blood pressures had better prognostic value than the conventional blood pressures. The 24-h SBP predicted risk of premature delivery and was inversely related to the duration of pregnancy and birth weight. After the exclusion of 41 women with white-coat hypertension, the highest predictive value was associated with PP. PP wider by 1SD was associated with 66% higher risk of premature delivery, and was associated with shortening of pregnancy by 2 weeks and 400 g lower birth weight, even after adjustment for SBP. In conclusion, ABPM is superior to conventional blood pressure measurements in predicting adverse outcome of pregnancy. Twenty-four-hour PP, of all classic indices, seems to be most closely related to increase of that risk.

Background: Ultrasonography’s usefulness in endometrial cancer (EC) diagnosis consists in its roles in staging and prediction of metastasis. Ultrasound-measured tumor-free distance from the tumor to the uterine serosa (uTFD) is a promising marker for these diagnostic and prognostic variables. The aim of the study was to determine the usefulness of this biomarker in locoregional staging, and thus in the prediction of lymph node metastasis (LNM). Methods: We conducted a single-institutional, prospective study on 116 consecutive patients with EC who underwent 2D transvaginal ultrasound examination. The uTFD marker was compared with the depth of ultrasound-measured myometrial invasion (uMI). Univariable and multivariable logit models were evaluated to assess the predictive power of the uTFD and uMI in regard to LNM. The reference standard was a final histopathology result. Survival was assessed by the Kaplan–Meier method. Results: LNM was found in 17% of the patients (20/116). In the univariable analysis, uMI and uTFD were significant predictors of LNM. The accuracy was 70.7%, and the NPV was 92.68% (OR 4.746, 95% CI 1.710–13.174) for uMI (p = 0.002), and they were 63.8% and 89.02% (OR 0.842, 95% CI 0.736–0.963), respectively, for uTFD (p = 0.01). The cutoff value for uTFD in the prediction of LNM was 5.2 mm. The association between absence of LNM and biomarker values of uMI < 1/2 and uTFD ≥ 5.2 mm was greater than that between the presence of metastases and uMI > 1/2 and uTFD values <5.2 mm. In the multivariable analysis, the accuracy of the uMI–uTFD model was 74%, and its NPV was 90.24% (p = non-significant). Neither uMI nor uTFD were surrogates for overall and recurrence-free survivals in endometrial cancer. Conclusions: Both uMI and uTFD, either alone or in combination, were valuable tools for gaining additional preoperative information on expected lymph node status. Negative lymph nodes status was better described by ultrasound biomarkers than a positive status. It was easier to use the uTFD rather than the uMI measurement as a biomarker of EC invasion, and the former still maintained a similar predictive value for lymph node metastases to the latter at diagnosis.

The aim of this study was to describe the clinical and sonographic features of ovarian metastases originating from colorectal cancer (mCRC), and to discriminate mCRC from primary ovarian cancer (OC). We conducted a multi-institutional, retrospective study of consecutive patients with ovarian mCRC who had undergone ultrasound examination using the International Ovarian Tumor Analysis (IOTA) terminology, with the addition of evaluating signs of necrosis and abdominal staging. A control group included patients with primary OC. Clinical and ultrasound data, subjective assessment (SA), and an assessment of different neoplasias in the adnexa (ADNEX) model were evaluated. Fisher's exact and Student's t-tests, the area under the receiver-operating characteristic curve (AUC), and classification and regression trees (CART) were used to conduct statistical analyses. In total, 162 patients (81 with OC and 81 with ovarian mCRC) were included. None of the patients with OC had undergone chemotherapy for CRC in the past, compared with 40% of patients with ovarian mCRC (p < 0.001). The ovarian mCRC tumors were significantly larger, a necrosis sign was more frequently present, and tumors had an irregular wall or were fixed less frequently; ascites, omental cake, and carcinomatosis were less common in mCRC than in primary OC. In a subgroup of patients with ovarian mCRC who had not undergone treatment for CRC in anamnesis, tumors were larger, and had fewer papillations and more locules compared with primary OC. The highest AUC for the discrimination of ovarian mCRC from primary OC was for CART (0.768), followed by SA (0.735) and ADNEX calculated with CA-125 (0.680). Ovarian mCRC and primary OC can be distinguished based on patient anamnesis, ultrasound pattern recognition, a proposed decision tree model, and an ADNEX model with CA-125 levels.

Background: Ultrasonography&rsquo;s usefulness in endometrial cancer (EC) diagnosis consists of its staging and predictive roles. Ultrasound-measured tumor-free distance from the tumor to the uterine serosa (uTFD) is a promising marker for this variable. The aim of the study was to determine the usefulness of this biomarker in locoregional staging, and thus in the prediction of lymph node metastasis (LNM). Methods: We conducted a single-institutional, prospective study on 116 consecutive patients with EC who underwent 2D transvaginal ultrasound examination. The uTFD marker was compared with the depth of ultrasound-measured myometrial invasion (uMI). Univariate and multivariate logit models were evaluated to assess the predictive power of the uTFD and uMI in regard to LNM. The reference standard was a final histopathology result. Survival was assessed by the Kaplan-Meyer method. Results: LNM was found in 17% of the patients (20/116). In the univariate analysis, uMI and uTFD were significant predictors of LNM. Accuracy was 70.7%, and NPV was 92.68% (OR 4.746, 95% CI 1.710-13.174) for uMI (p = 0.002), and 63.8%, and 89.02% (OR 0.842, 95% CI 0.736 &ndash; 0.963), respectively, for uTFD (p = 0.01). The cut-off value for uTFD in the prediction of LNM was 5.2 mm. The absence of LNM was associated more with biomarker values uMI &amp;lt;1/2 and uTFD &amp;gt;=5.2 mm than with the presence of metastases with uMI &amp;gt;1/2 and uTFD values &amp;lt;5.2 mm. In the multivariate analysis, the accuracy of the uMI-uTFD model was 74%, and NPV was 90.24% (p = NS). Neither uMI nor uTFD are surrogates for overall and recurrence-free survivals in endometrial cancer. Conclusions: Both uMI and uTFD, either alone or in combination, are valuable tools for gaining additional preoperative information on expected lymph node status. Negative lymph nodes status is better described by ultrasound biomarkers than a positive status. It is easier to use uTFD measurement as a biomarker of EC invasion than uMI, and the former still maintains a similar predictive value for lymph node metastases to the latter at diagnosis.