• A Cilotti, C Weiss, P Bagnolesi, C Campassi, M Bimbi, and C Bartolozzi.
• Istituto di Radiologia, Università, Pisa.
• Radiol Med. 1992 May 1;83(5):630-5.

AbstractThe authors report their experience with US in gynecologic emergencies through a retrospective study on 105 patients presenting with acute abdomen of suspected gynecologic nature. The series included 3 groups of patients: Group I: 59 patients all submitted to immediate surgery. The following pathologic conditions were observed: ectopic pregnancy (23 cases), torsion or hemorrhage from ovarian cysts (13 cases), pyosalpinx or tubo-ovarian abscess (9 cases), torsion of pedunculated uterine leiomyoma (7 cases), intraperitoneal bleeding from hemorrhagic corpus luteum (6 cases), hematocolpos and hematometra from imperforate hymen (3 cases). Two false positives, not included in this group, resulting from appendicular abscesses and misinterpreted as ovarian, were submitted to surgery in a gynecologic unit. Group II: 19 patients treated with medical therapy for the following conditions: torsion or hemorrhage from hyperstimulated ovary (10 cases), pyosalpinx or tubo-ovarian abscess (9 cases). Group III: 25 patients in whom neither US nor clinical examination revealed positive gynecologic findings. Both US and clinical follow-up were negative in these patients. The study was aimed at evaluating the role of US in identifying both lesion and peritoneal involvement, and in the diagnosis of nature. US proved a valuable tool in the first two diagnostic steps, allowing to confirm/dismiss active pathologic conditions, to indicate the medical/surgical treatment (immediate or delayed), to detect associated pathologies to study with further examinations. As for lesion nature, US alone proved poorly useful if not correlated with an accurate clinical history.

28 keywords...

hide…