Skip to main content
Log in

Pelvic ultrasound immediately following MDCT in female patients with abdominal/pelvic pain: is it always necessary?

  • Original Article
  • Published:
Emergency Radiology Aims and scope Submit manuscript

Abstract

To determine the added value of reimaging the female pelvis with ultrasound (US) immediately following multidetector CT (MDCT) in the emergent setting. CT and US exams of 70 patients who underwent MDCT for evaluation of abdominal/pelvic pain followed by pelvic ultrasound within 48 h were retrospectively reviewed by three readers. Initially, only the CT images were reviewed followed by evaluation of CT images in conjunction with US images. Diagnostic confidence was recorded for each reading and an exact Wilcoxon signed rank test was performed to compare the two. Changes in diagnosis based on combined CT and US readings versus CT readings alone were identified. Confidence intervals (95%) were derived for the percentage of times US reimaging can be expected to lead to a change in diagnosis relative to the diagnosis based on CT interpretation alone. Ultrasound changed the diagnosis for the ovaries/adnexa 8.1% of the time (three reader average); the majority being cases of a suspected CT abnormality found to be normal on US. Ultrasound changed the diagnosis for the uterus 11.9% of the time (three reader average); the majority related to the endometrial canal. The 95% confidence intervals for the ovaries/adnexa and uterus were 5–12.5% and 8–17%, respectively. Ten cases of a normal CT were followed by a normal US with 100% agreement across all three readers. Experienced readers correctly diagnosed ruptured ovarian cysts and tubo-ovarian abscesses (TOA) based on CT alone with 100% agreement. US reimaging after MDCT of the abdomen and pelvis is not helpful: (1) following a normal CT of the pelvic organs or (2) when CT findings are diagnostic and/or characteristic of certain entities such as ruptured cysts and TOA. Reimaging with ultrasound is warranted for (1) less-experienced readers to improve diagnostic confidence or when CT findings are not definitive, (2) further evaluation of suspected endometrial abnormalities. A distinction should be made between the need for immediate vs. follow-up imaging with US after CT.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this article

Price excludes VAT (USA)
Tax calculation will be finalised during checkout.

Instant access to the full article PDF.

Fig. 1
Fig. 2
Fig. 3
Fig. 4
Fig. 5

Similar content being viewed by others

References

  1. Patel MD, Dubinsky TJ (2007) Reimaging the female pelvis with ultrasound after CT: general principles. Ultrasound Q 23:177–187

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  2. White M, Stella J (2005) Ovarian torsion: 10-year perspective. Emerg Med Australas 17:231–237

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  3. Rha SE, Byun JY, Jung SE et al (2002) CT and MR imaging features of adnexal torsion. Radiographics 22:283–294

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  4. Kimura I, Togashi K, Kawakami S, Takakura K, Mori T, Konishi J (1994) Ovarian torsion: CT and MR imaging appearances. Radiology 190:337–341

    PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  5. Chang HC, Bhatt S, Dogra VS (2008) Pearls and pitfalls in diagnosis of ovarian torsion. Radiographics 28:1355–1368

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  6. Bennett GL, Slywotzky CM, Giovanniello G (2002) Gynecologic causes of acute pelvic pain: spectrum of CT findings. Radiographics 22:785–801

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  7. Hiller N, Appelbaum L, Simanovsky N, Lev-Sagi A, Aharoni D, Sella T (2007) CT features of adnexal torsion. AJR 189:124–129

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  8. Lee JH, Park SB, Shin SH, Jang JC, Lee WC, Jeong AK, Yang MJ (2009) Value of intra-adnexal and extra-adnexal computed tomographic imaging features diagnosing torsion of adnexal tumor. JCAT 33:872–876

    Google Scholar 

  9. Moore C, Meyers AB, Capotasto J, Bokhari J (2009) Prevalence of abnormal CT findings in patients with proven ovarian torsion and a proposed triage schema. Emerg Radiol 16:115–120

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  10. Grossman J, Ricci ZJ, Rozenblit A, Freemna K, Mazzariol F, Stein MW (2008) Efficacy of contrast-enahnced CT in assessing the endometrium. AJR 191:664–669

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  11. Hertzberg BS, Kliewer MA, Paulson EK (1999) Ovarian cyst rupture causing hemoperitoneum: imaging features and the potential for misdiagnosis. Abdom Imaging 24:304–308

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  12. Borders RJ, Breiman RS, Yeh BM, Qayyum A, Coakley FV (2004) Computed tomography of corpus luteal cysts. JCAT 28:340–342

    Google Scholar 

  13. Potter AW, Chandrasekhar CA (2008) US and CT evaluation of acute pelvic pain of gynecologic origin in nonpregnant premenopausal patients. Radiographics 28:1645–1659

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  14. Sam JW, Jacobs JE, Birnbaum BA (2002) Spectrum of CT findings in acute pyogenic pelvic inflammatory disease. Radiographics 22:1327–1334

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  15. Yitta S, Hecht EM, Slywotzky CM, Bennett GL (2009) Added value of multiplanar reformation in the multidetector CT evaluation of the female pelvis: a pictorial review. Radiographics 29:1987–2003

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

Download references

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

Authors

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Silaja Yitta.

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Cite this article

Yitta, S., Mausner, E.V., Kim, A. et al. Pelvic ultrasound immediately following MDCT in female patients with abdominal/pelvic pain: is it always necessary?. Emerg Radiol 18, 371–380 (2011). https://doi.org/10.1007/s10140-011-0962-7

Download citation

  • Received:

  • Accepted:

  • Published:

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s10140-011-0962-7

Keywords

Navigation