Comparative Morphological Characteristics Of Uterine Diseases Identified By Ultrasound Examination
Keywords:
Ultrasound examination, Uterine diseases, Morphology, Fibroids (Leiomyoma), Adenomyosis, Endometritis, Echography, Histopathology, Diagnosis, Reproductive healthAbstract
This article presents a comparative analysis of the morphological characteristics of uterine diseases identified through ultrasound examination and evaluates their clinical relevance and diagnostic value. The study includes a range of uterine pathologies such as fibroids (leiomyomas), adenomyosis, endometritis, and other structural abnormalities observed in patients of varying reproductive ages. Ultrasound (US) remains one of the most effective, non-invasive, and accessible diagnostic tools in gynecology. Its high sensitivity allows for the early detection of changes in uterine structure, even in asymptomatic patients. In this study, the echo graphic features of various uterine diseases were compared with their corresponding histopathological (morphological) findings obtained through biopsy, curettage, or surgical specimens. The specific ultrasound criteria and patterns for each pathology were described in detail to aid in differential diagnosis.
For example, uterine fibroids were characterized by well-defined, hypoechoic masses with a homogeneous or heterogeneous internal structure, while adenomyosis typically showed a diffusely enlarged uterus with myometrial cysts and indistinct endometrial-myometrial borders. Endometritis was associated with an irregular endometrial lining and increased vascularity on Doppler imaging.
The results of the study demonstrate that when ultrasound data are interpreted in conjunction with morphological analysis, the accuracy of diagnosis significantly improves. This integrated approach enhances clinical decision-making, enabling timely and appropriate treatment interventions. The paper concludes that sonographic examination, combined with histological assessment, remains essential for the comprehensive evaluation of uterine diseases.
Downloads
References
Benacerraf, B. R., Shipp, T. D., & Bromley, B. (2006). What does a missed diagnosis of uterine fibroids mean for patients? Journal of Ultrasound in Medicine, 25(5), 619–622. https://doi.org/10.7863/jum.2006.25.5.619
Dueholm, M. (2017). Transvaginal ultrasound for diagnosis of adenomyosis: A review. Best Practice & Research Clinical Obstetrics & Gynaecology, 40, 41–52. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.bpobgyn.2016.09.007
Epstein, E., & Valentin, L. (2006). Gray-scale and color Doppler ultrasound features of endometrial pathology. Ultrasound in Obstetrics and Gynecology, 27(4), 412–421. https://doi.org/10.1002/uog.2705
Gordts, S., Brosens, J. J., & Fusi, L. (2008). Uterine adenomyosis: A review of the current knowledge. Reproductive BioMedicine Online, 17(4), 535–541. https://doi.org/10.1016/S1472-6483(10)60394-7
Goldstein, S. R. (2010). Modern evaluation of the endometrium. Obstetrics & Gynecology, 116(1), 168–176. https://doi.org/10.1097/AOG.0b013e3181eebf5d
Okaro, E., Condous, G., Khalid, A., Timmerman, D., Ameye, L., & Bourne, T. (2006). The use of ultrasound-based “soft markers” for the prediction of pelvic pathology in women with chronic pelvic pain—Can we reduce the need for laparoscopy? BJOG: An International Journal of Obstetrics & Gynaecology, 113(3), 251–256. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1471-0528.2006.00841.x
Szkodziak, P., Szkodziak, F., & Sławomir, W. (2021). Diagnosis and treatment of uterine fibroids—current knowledge and practice. International Journal of Environmental Research and Public Health, 18(9), 4721. https://doi.org/10.3390/ijerph18094721
Timmerman, D., Van den Bosch, T., Peeraer, K., Debrouwere, E., De Moor, B., & Vergote, I. (2004). Endometrial polyps: Sensitivity and specificity of transvaginal sonography in premenopausal women. Ultrasound in Obstetrics and Gynecology, 24(5), 596–602. https://doi.org/10.1002/uog.1707
Van den Bosch, T., & Dueholm, M. (2017). Ultrasound in the diagnosis of endometrial disease. Best Practice & Research Clinical Obstetrics & Gynaecology, 40, 64–74. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.bpobgyn.2016.09.005
Downloads
Published
How to Cite
Issue
Section
License
This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License.
You are free to:
- Share — copy and redistribute the material in any medium or format
- Adapt — remix, transform, and build upon the material for any purpose, even commercially.
Terms:
- Attribution — You must give appropriate credit, provide a link to the license, and indicate if changes were made. You may do so in any reasonable manner, but not in any way that suggests the licensor endorses you or your use.
- No additional restrictions — You may not apply legal terms or technological measures that legally restrict others from doing anything the license permits.
