AJR Women's Imaging Online
HOME HELP FEEDBACK SUBSCRIPTIONS ARCHIVE SEARCH TABLE OF CONTENTS
 QUICK SEARCH:   [advanced]


     


This Article
Right arrow Figures Only
Right arrow Full Text
Right arrow Full Text (PDF)
Right arrow Alert me when this article is cited
Right arrow Alert me if a correction is posted
Right arrow Citation Map
Services
Right arrow Email this article to a friend
Right arrow Similar articles in this journal
Right arrow Similar articles in PubMed
Right arrow Alert me to new issues of the journal
Right arrow Download to citation manager
Right arrow reprints & permissions
Citing Articles
Right arrow Citing Articles via HighWire
Right arrow Citing Articles via Google Scholar
Google Scholar
Right arrow Articles by Birchard, K. R.
Right arrow Articles by Semelka, R. C.
Right arrow Search for Related Content
PubMed
Right arrow PubMed Citation
Right arrow Articles by Birchard, K. R.
Right arrow Articles by Semelka, R. C.
Social Bookmarking
 Add to CiteULike   Add to Complore   Add to Connotea   Add to Del.icio.us   Add to Digg   Add to Reddit   Add to Technorati  
What's this?
AJR 2005; 184:452-458
© American Roentgen Ray Society

MRI of Acute Abdominal and Pelvic Pain in Pregnant Patients

Katherine R. Birchard1, Michele A. Brown1,2, W. Brian Hyslop1, Zeynep Firat1 and Richard C. Semelka1

1 Department of Radiology, University of North Carolina Hospitals, 101 Manning Dr., 2006 Old Clinic Bldg., Chapel Hill, NC 27599-7510.
2 Department of Radiology, University of California at San Diego, San Diego, CA.

OBJECTIVE. The purpose of this study was to show the usefulness of MRI in the evaluation of pregnant women with acute abdominal or pelvic pain.

SUBJECTS AND METHODS. All MRI studies of pregnant patients who were referred for examination because of acute abdominal or pelvic pain between June 2002 and May 2004 were included in this study (n = 29). The use of MRI was at the discretion of the clinician. Fetal sonography was performed in all patients before any other imaging. A complete abdominal sonographic examination was performed in six patients before MRI. In the remaining 23 patients, MRI was the choice for primary imaging. Multiplanar multisequence MR images of the abdomen and pelvis were obtained in each patient. Unenhanced images were reviewed by an experienced radiologist to determine whether a diagnosis could be made without the administration of gadolinium. In 22 of 29 studies, gadolinium was not administered. The prospective clinical MR interpretations were compared with follow-up medical, surgical, and obstetric records to determine the correctness of the interpretation. All patients were followed up until the date of article submission or until the date of final chart entry.

RESULTS. Correlation of prospective clinical MR interpretations with follow-up medical records showed correct identification of disease entities in all but one patient. In one patient, torsion of the ovary was neither described prospectively nor seen in retrospect. The following disease processes were correctly identified using MRI: appendiceal abscess (n = 1), appendicitis (n = 2), intraabdominal and rectus muscle abscess (n = 1), intussusception (n = 1), pancreatitis (n = 1), ulcerative colitis (n = 1), Crohn's disease with diffuse peritoneal inflammation (n = 1), bilateral adrenal hemorrhage (n = 1), pyelonephritis (n = 2), hydronephrosis (n = 1), uterine fibroid degeneration (n = 2), degeneration and torsion of a submucosal uterine fibroid (n = 1), simple ovarian cysts (n = 1), and ovarian torsion (n = 1). Twelve of the 29 patients had normal findings on MR examinations and unremarkable follow-up.

CONCLUSION. The intrinsic safety of MRI and its ability to accurately show abdominal and pelvic disease in pregnant patients make it highly useful in the evaluation of these patients.


Add to CiteULike CiteULike   Add to Complore Complore   Add to Connotea Connotea   Add to Del.icio.us Del.icio.us   Add to Digg Digg   Add to Reddit Reddit   Add to Technorati Technorati    What's this?


This article has been cited by other articles:


Home page
RadiologyHome page
A. van Randen, S. Bipat, A. H. Zwinderman, D. T. Ubbink, J. Stoker, and M. A. Boermeester
Acute Appendicitis: Meta-Analysis of Diagnostic Performance of CT and Graded Compression US Related to Prevalence of Disease
Radiology, October 1, 2008; 249(1): 97 - 106.
[Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]


Home page
RadiologyHome page
K. S. Lee, N. M. Rofsky, and I. Pedrosa
Localization of the Appendix at MR Imaging during Pregnancy: Utility of the Cecal Tilt Angle
Radiology, October 1, 2008; 249(1): 134 - 141.
[Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]


Home page
Am. J. Roentgenol.Home page
T. A. Jaffe, C. M. Miller, and E. M. Merkle
Practice Patterns in Imaging of the Pregnant Patient with Abdominal Pain: A Survey of Academic Centers
Am. J. Roentgenol., November 1, 2007; 189(5): 1128 - 1134.
[Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]


Home page
RadioGraphicsHome page
S. J. Patel, D. L. Reede, D. S. Katz, R. Subramaniam, and J. K. Amorosa
Imaging the Pregnant Patient for Nonobstetric Conditions: Algorithms and Radiation Dose Considerations
RadioGraphics, November 1, 2007; 27(6): 1705 - 1722.
[Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]


Home page
RadiologyHome page
E. Lazarus, W. W. Mayo-Smith, M. B. Mainiero, and P. K. Spencer
CT in the Evaluation of Nontraumatic Abdominal Pain in Pregnant Women
Radiology, September 1, 2007; 244(3): 784 - 790.
[Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]


Home page
RadioGraphicsHome page
A. Singh, R. Danrad, P. F. Hahn, M. A. Blake, P. R. Mueller, and R. A. Novelline
MR Imaging of the Acute Abdomen and Pelvis: Acute Appendicitis and Beyond
RadioGraphics, September 1, 2007; 27(5): 1419 - 1431.
[Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]


Home page
RadioGraphicsHome page
I. Pedrosa, E. A. Zeikus, D. Levine, and N. M. Rofsky
MR Imaging of Acute Right Lower Quadrant Pain in Pregnant and Nonpregnant Patients
RadioGraphics, May 1, 2007; 27(3): 721 - 743.
[Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]


Home page
RadioGraphicsHome page
D. S. Katz, V. Merunka, J. J. Hines, E. M. Meiner, I. Pedrosa, D. Levine, and N. M. Rofsky
Invited Commentary * Authors' Response
RadioGraphics, May 1, 2007; 27(3): 743 - 753.
[Full Text] [PDF]


Home page
Obstet GynecolHome page
A. D. Lyerly, L. M. Mitchell, E. M. Armstrong, L. H. Harris, R. Kukla, M. Kuppermann, and M. O. Little
Risks, Values, and Decision Making Surrounding Pregnancy
Obstet. Gynecol., April 1, 2007; 109(4): 979 - 984.
[Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]


Home page
Am. J. Roentgenol.Home page
J. E. Jacobs
CT and Sonography for Suspected Acute Appendicitis: A Commentary.
Am. J. Roentgenol., April 1, 2006; 186(4): 1094 - 1096.
[Full Text] [PDF]


Home page
Am. J. Roentgenol.Home page
A. Oto, P. N. Srinivasan, R. D. Ernst, M. Koroglu, F. Cesani, T. Nishino, and G. Chaljub
Revisiting MRI for appendix location during pregnancy.
Am. J. Roentgenol., March 1, 2006; 186(3): 883 - 887.
[Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]


Home page
J Ultrasound MedHome page
D. M. Sherer, R. Stimphil, M. Hellman, H. Zinn, C. Bitton, S. Angus, W. Chung, and O. Abulafia
Marked Maternal Ureteropelvic Obstruction Mimicking a Large Ovarian Mass at 20 Weeks' Gestation
J. Ultrasound Med., September 1, 2005; 24(9): 1309 - 1312.
[Full Text] [PDF]




HOME HELP FEEDBACK SUBSCRIPTIONS ARCHIVE SEARCH TABLE OF CONTENTS
Copyright © 2005 by the American Roentgen Ray Society.