|
|
||||||||
EDUCATION EXHIBIT |
1 From the Divisions of Vascular and Interventional Radiology (S.G., D.K.R., M.S.B., M.R.A.) and Womens Imaging (S.G.), Department of Medical Imaging, Toronto General Hospital, University Health NetworkMount Sinai Hospital, University of Toronto, 585 University Ave, NCSB 1C-553, Toronto, Ontario, Canada M5G 2N2. Presented as an education exhibit at the 2003 RSNA Annual Meeting. Received February 16, 2004; revision requested June 17 and received January 3, 2005; accepted January 10. All authors have no financial relationships to disclose. Address correspondence to D.K.R. (e-mail: dheeraj.rajan{at}uhn.on.ca).
Transabdominal and transvaginal ultrasonography (US) are commonly used to assess the uterus and pelvis prior to and following uterine artery embolization (UAE) for symptomatic leiomyomas (fibroids). Preprocedural US may help identify relative contraindications for UAE, whereas postprocedural US can help determine the quality and quantity of fibroid involution and help identify any complications associated with the procedure. The consulting radiologist should be familiar with certain typical postprocedural US findings, which might otherwise be improperly interpreted, leading to unnecessary intervention. Magnetic resonance (MR) imaging or computed tomography will frequently provide the most accurate information in UAE patients with certain pathologic conditions, and early study results suggest that MR imaging may be helpful in predicting treatment response. Nevertheless, US is a readily available first-line imaging modality and a well-accepted method for both pre- and postprocedural evaluation of patients who undergo UAE. A proper understanding of the US findings in this patient population allows objective determination of treatment response and detection of most of the commonly recognized complications that are associated with UAE.
© RSNA, 2005
Related Article
RadioGraphics 2005 25: 1173-1176.
This article has been cited by other articles:
![]() |
A. REYNOLDS Diagnosis and Management Of Uterine Fibroids Radiol. Technol., November 1, 2007; 79(2): 157 - 178. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF] |
||||
![]() |
J. B. Spies, D. K. Rajan, and M. R. Asch Invited Commentary * Authors' Response RadioGraphics, September 1, 2005; 25(5): 1173 - 1176. [Full Text] [PDF] |
||||
| HOME | HELP | FEEDBACK | SUBSCRIPTIONS | ARCHIVE | SEARCH | TABLE OF CONTENTS |
| RADIOGRAPHICS | RADIOLOGY | RSNA JOURNALS ONLINE |