Skip to main content

Advertisement

SpringerLink
Log in

The spectrum of imaging appearances of müllerian duct anomalies: focus on MR imaging

  • Review
  • Published:
Japanese Journal of Radiology Aims and scope Submit manuscript

Abstract

Müllerian duct anomalies (MDAs) are the result of incomplete development, vertical or lateral fusion, or absorption of the müllerian ducts. The range of anomalies includes uterovaginal agenesis or hypoplasia, unicornuate uterus, uterus didelphys, bicornuate uterus, septate uterus, and arcuate uterus. Correct diagnosis and classification of these anomalies are essential because pregnancy outcomes and treatment options vary between the types of anomaly. Furthermore, early identification of MDAs helps to avoid prolonged symptomatic periods and the complications that may subsequently arise, such as infertility, endometriosis, and neoplasm. Although many of these abnormalities are initially diagnosed by ultrasound or hysterosalpingography, MR imaging is the most accurate noninvasive modality available for classification of the various anomalies because of its better anatomic assessment compared with other diagnostic modalities. Familiarity with the wide variety of MDA presentations can help in the planning of appropriate treatment.

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

Access this article

Log in via an institution

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

Instant access to the full article PDF.

Institutional subscriptions

Fig. 1
Fig. 2
Fig. 3
Fig. 4
Fig. 5
Fig. 6
Fig. 7
Fig. 8
Fig. 9
Fig. 10

Similar content being viewed by others

References

  1. Ashton D, Amin HK, Richart RM, Neuwirth RS. The incidence of asymptomatic uterine anomalies in women undergoing transcervical tubal sterilization. Obstet Gynecol. 1988;72:28–30.

    CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  2. Raga F, Bauset C, Remohi J, Bonilla-Musoles F, Simon C, Pellicer A. Reproductive impact of congenital müllerian anomalies. Hum Reprod. 1997;12:2277–81.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  3. Byrne J, Nussbaum-Blask A, Taylor WS, et al. Prevalence of mullerian duct anomalies detected at ultrasound. Am J Med Genet. 2000;94:9–12.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  4. Lin PC, Bhatnagar KP, Nettleton GS, Nakajima ST. Female genital anomalies affecting reproduction. Fertil Steril. 2002;78:899–915.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  5. Rackow BW, Arici A. Reproductive performance of women with müllerian anomalies. Curr Opin Obstet Gynecol. 2007;19:229–37.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  6. Buttram VC Jr, Gibbons WE. Müllerian anomalies: a proposed classification—an analysis of 144 cases. Fertil Steril. 1979;32:40–6.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  7. Li S, Qayyum A, Coakley FV, Hricak H. Association of renal agenesis and mullerian duct anomalies. J Comput Assist Tomogr. 2000;24:829–34.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  8. The American Fertility Society. The American Fertility Society classifications of adnexal adhesions, distal tubal occlusion, tubal occlusion secondary to tubal ligation, tubal pregnancies, müllerian anomalies and intrauterine adhesions. Fertil Steril. 1988;49:944–55.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  9. Sanfilippo JS, Wakim NG, Schikler KN, Yussman MA. Endometriosis in association with uterine anomaly. Am J Obstet Gynecol. 1986;154:39–43.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  10. Watanabe Y, Etoh T, Nakai H. Adenocarcinoma of the lower female genital tract in patients with Herlyn-Werner-Wunderlich syndrome. Am J Obstet Gynecol. 2012;207:e5–6.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  11. Troiano RN, McCarthy SM. Mullerian duct anomalies: imaging and clinical issues. Radiology. 2004;233:19–34.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  12. Imaoka I, Wada A, Matsuo M, Yoshida M, Kitagaki H, Sugimura K. MR imaging of disorders associated with female infertility: use in diagnosis, treatment, and management. Radiographics. 2003;23:1401–21.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  13. Behr SC, Courtier JL, Qayyum A. Imaging of müllerian duct anomalies. Radiographics. 2012;32:E233–50.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  14. O’Neill MJ, Yoder IC, Connolly SA, Mueller PR. Imaging evaluation and classification of developmental anomalies of the female reproductive system with an emphasis on MR imaging. AJR Am J Roentgenol. 1999;173:407–16.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  15. Mueller GC, Hussain HK, Smith YR, Quint EH, Carlos RC, Johnson TD, et al. Müllerian duct anomalies: comparison of MRI diagnosis and clinical diagnosis. AJR Am J Roentgenol. 2007;189:1294–302.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  16. Robbins JB, Parry JP, Guite KM, Hanson ME, Chow LC, Kliewer MA, et al. MRI of pregnancy-related issues: müllerian duct anomalies. AJR Am J Roentgenol. 2012;198:302–10.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  17. Pellerito JS, McCarthy SM, Doyle MB, Glickman MG, DeCherney AH. Diagnosis of uterine anomalies: relative accuracy of MR imaging, endovaginal sonography, and hysterosalpingography. Radiology. 1992;183:795–800.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  18. Deutch TD, Abuhamad AZ. The role of 3-dimensional ultrasonography and magnetic resonance imaging in the diagnosis of Müllerian duct anomalies. J Ultrasound Med. 2008;27:413–23.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  19. Agrawal G, Riherd JM, Busse RF, Hinshaw JL, Sadowski EA. Evaluation of uterine anomalies: 3D FRFSE cube versus standard 2D FRFSE. AJR Am J Roentgenol. 2009;193:W558–62.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  20. Tanaka YO, Kurosaki Y, Kobayashi T, Eguchi N, Mori K, Satoh Y, et al. Uterus didelphys associated with obstructed hemivagina and ipsilateral renal agenesis: MR findings in seven cases. Abdom Imaging. 1998;23:437–41.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  21. Yoo RE, Cho JY, Kim SY, Kim SH. Magnetic resonance evaluation of müllerian remnants in Mayer-Rokitansky-Küster-Hauser syndrome. Korean J Radiol. 2013;14:233–9.

    Article  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  22. Morcel K, Camborieux L, Programme de Recherches sur les Aplasies Müllériennes, Guerrier D. Mayer-Rokitansky-Küster-Hauser (MRKH) syndrome. Orphanet J Rare Dis. 2007;14:13.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  23. Griffin N, Grant LA, Sala E. Magnetic resonance imaging of vaginal and vulval pathology. Eur Radiol. 2008;18:1269–80.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  24. Preibsch H, Rall K, Wietek BM, Brucker SY, Staebler A, Claussen CD, et al. Clinical value of magnetic resonance imaging in patients with Mayer-Rokitansky-Küster-Hauser (MRKH) syndrome: diagnosis of associated malformations, uterine rudiments and intrauterine endometrium. Eur Radiol. 2014;24:1621–7.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  25. Hall-Craggs MA, Williams CE, Pattison SH, Kirkham AP, Creighton SM. Mayer-Rokitansky-Kuster-Hauser syndrome: diagnosis with MR imaging. Radiology. 2013;269:787–92.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  26. Rock JA, Schlaff WD. The obstetric consequences of uterovaginal anomalies. Fertil Steril. 1985;43:681–92.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  27. Herlyn U, Werner H. Simultaneous occurrence of an open Gartner-duct cyst, a homolateral aplasia of the kidney and a double uterus as a typical syndrome of abnormalities. Geburtshilfe Frauenheilkd. 1971;31:340–7.

    CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  28. Smith NA, Laufer MR. Obstructed hemivagina and ipsilateral renal anomaly (OHVIRA) syndrome: management and follow-up. Fertil Steril. 2007;87:918–22.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  29. Madureira AJ, Mariz CM, Bernardes JC, Ramos IM. Case 94: uterus didelphys with obstructing hemivaginal septum and ipsilateral renal agenesis. Radiology. 2006;239:602–6.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  30. Del Vescovo R, Battisti S, Di Paola V, Piccolo CL, Cazzato RL, Sansoni I, et al. Herlyn-Werner-Wunderlich syndrome: MRI findings, radiological guide (two cases and literature review), and differential diagnosis. BMC Med Imaging. 2012;12:4.

    Article  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  31. Uehara T, Onda T, Sasajima Y, Sawada M, Kasamatsu T. A case of vaginal clear cell adenocarcinoma complicated with congenital anomalies of the genitourinary tract and metanephric remnant without prenatal diethylstilbestrol exposure. J Obstet Gynaecol Res. 2010;36:681–5.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  32. Acién P, Acién M, Sánchez-Ferrer M. Complex malformations of the female genital tract. New types and revision of classification. Hum Reprod. 2004;19:2377–84.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  33. Acién P, Acién M, Romero-Maroto J. Blind hemibladder, ectopic ureterocele, or Gartner’s duct cyst in a woman with müllerian malformation and supposed unilateral renal agenesis: a case report. Int Urogynecol J. 2010;21:365–9.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  34. Patton PE, Novy MJ, Lee DM, Hickok LR. The diagnosis and reproductive outcome after surgical treatment of the complete septate uterus, duplicated cervix and vaginal septum. Am J Obstet Gynecol. 2004;190:1669–75.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  35. Propst AM, Hill JA 3rd. Anatomic factors associated with recurrent pregnancy loss. Semin Reprod Med. 2000;18:341–50.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  36. Chandler TM, Machan LS, Cooperberg PL, Har-ris AC, Chang SD. Mullerian duct anomalies: from diagnosis to intervention. Br J Radiol. 2009;82:1034–42.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  37. Homer HA, Li TC, Cooke ID. The septate uterus: a review of management and reproductive outcome. Fertil Steril. 2000;73:1–14.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  38. Porcu G, Cravello L, D’Ercole C, Cohen D, Roger V, de Montgolfier R, Blanc B. Hysteroscopic metroplasty for septate uterus and repetitive abortions: reproductive outcome. Eur J Obstet Gynecol Reprod Biol. 2000;88:81–4.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  39. Herbst AL, Ulfelder H, Poskanzer DC. Adenocarcinoma of the vagina. Association of maternal stilbestrol therapy with tumor appearance in young women. N Engl J Med. 1971;284:878–81.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  40. Rennell CL. T-shaped uterus in diethylstilbestrol (DES) exposure. AJR Am J Roentgenol. 1979;132:979–80.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

Download references

Acknowledgements

We are grateful to Eijiro Yamashita, BS, Nobuo Hashimoto, BS, Ryohei Fukui, BS, Rie Kashiwai, BS, and Sayaka Takahashi, BS, for technical support in obtaining the high-quality MR images used in this study.

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. Division of Radiology, Department of Pathophysiological and Therapeutic Science, Faculty of Medicine, Tottori University, 36-1 Nishi-cho, Yonago, Tottori, 683-8504, Japan

    Takeru Fukunaga, Shinya Fujii, Chie Inoue, Naoko Mukuda, Yoshio Tanabe & Toshihide Ogawa

  2. Department of Radiology, Yoka Hospital, 1878-1 Yoka-cho Yoka, Yabu, Hyogo, 667-8555, Japan

    Atsushi Murakami

  3. Division of Reproductive-Perinatal Medicine and Gynecological Oncology, Department of Surgery, Faculty of Medicine, Tottori University, 36-1 Nishi-cho, Yonago, Tottori, 683-8504, Japan

    Tasuku Harada

Authors
  1. Takeru Fukunaga
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  2. Shinya Fujii
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  3. Chie Inoue
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  4. Naoko Mukuda
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  5. Atsushi Murakami
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  6. Yoshio Tanabe
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  7. Tasuku Harada
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  8. Toshihide Ogawa
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Takeru Fukunaga.

Ethics declarations

Conflict of interest

The authors declare that they have no conflict of interest.

Ethical statement

This article does not contain any studies with human participants or animals performed by any of the authors.

About this article

Check for updates. Verify currency and authenticity via CrossMark

Cite this article

Fukunaga, T., Fujii, S., Inoue, C. et al. The spectrum of imaging appearances of müllerian duct anomalies: focus on MR imaging. Jpn J Radiol 35, 697–706 (2017). https://doi.org/10.1007/s11604-017-0681-4

Download citation

  • Received:

  • Accepted:

  • Published:

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s11604-017-0681-4

Keywords

Search

Navigation