Skip to main content
SpringerLink
Log in

Malformazioni congenite e patologia benigna dell’utero

  • Chapter
Imaging dell’Apparato Urogenitale

  • 568 Accesses

Riassunto

Le malformazioni dell’utero sono associate a elevata incidenza di alterazioni della fertilità e problemi ostetrici. L’incidenza e la prevalenza di tali malformazioni variano molto, dallo 0,16 al 10% [1], dipendendo sia dalle modalità di imaging sia dai sistemi di classificazione utilizzati. In donne valutate con ecografia per indicazioni non ostetriche l’incidenza delle malformazioni dell’utero è risultata pari allo 0,4%, mentre in donne valutate con isterosalpingografia (HSG) per indicazioni ostetriche l’incidenza è risultata pari all’8–10% [2]. Le tappe organogenetiche sono condizionate da stimoli ormonali e da fattori ambientali locali (tossici, infettivi, carenziali, iatrogeni), che possono alterare lo sviluppo dell’apparato genitale femminile.

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

Access this chapter

Log in via an institution
Chapter
USD 29.95
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Available as PDF
  • Read on any device
  • Instant download
  • Own it forever
eBook
USD 99.00
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Available as PDF
  • Read on any device
  • Instant download
  • Own it forever
Hardcover Book
USD 54.99
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Durable hardcover edition
  • Dispatched in 3 to 5 business days
  • Free shipping worldwide - see info

Tax calculation will be finalised at checkout

Purchases are for personal use only

Institutional subscriptions

Preview

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

Bibliografia

  1. Olpin JD, Heilbrun M (2009) Imaging of müllerian duct anomalies. Clin Obstet Gynecol 52:40–56

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  2. Troiano RN, McCarthy SM (2004) müllerian duct anomalies: imaging and clinical issues 1. Radiology 233:19–34

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  3. Saleem SN (2003) MR imaging diagnosis of uterovaginal anomalies: current state of the art. Radiographics 23(5):e13

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  4. Yoder IC, Hall DA (1991) Hysterosalpingography in the 1990s. AJR Am J Roentgenol 157:675–683.

    CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  5. Wu MH, Hsu CC, Huang KE (1997) Detection of congenital müllerian duct anomalies using three-dimensional ultrasound. J Clin Ultrasound 25:487–492

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  6. Pellerito JS, McCarthy SM, Doyle MB et al (1992) Diagnosis of uterine anomalies: relative accuracy of MR imaging, endovaginal ultrasound, and hysterosalpingography. Radiology 183:795–800

    CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  7. Buttram VC, Gibbons WE (1979) müllerian anomalies: a proposed classification (an analysis of 144 cases). Fertil Steril 32:40–46.

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  8. The American Fertility Society classifications of adnexal adhesions, distal tubal occlusion, tubal occlusion secondary to tubal ligation, tubal pregnancies, müllerian anomalies and intrauterine adhesions. (1988) Fertil Steril 49:944–955

    Google Scholar 

  9. Funqueira BLP, Allen LM, Spitzer RF et al (2009) Müllerian duct anomalies and mimics in children and adolescents: correlative intraoperative assessment with clinical imaging. Radiographics 29:1085–1103

    Article  Google Scholar 

  10. Fedele L, Zamberletti D, Vercellini P et al (1987) Reproductive performance of women with unicornuate uterus. Fertil Steril 47:416–419

    CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  11. Ugur M, Turan C, Mungan T et al (1995) Endometriosis in association with müllerian anomalies. Gynecol Obstet Invest 40:261–264

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  12. Rock JA, Schlaff WD (1985) The obstetric consequences of uterovaginal anomalies. Fertil Steril 43:681–692

    CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  13. Propst AM, Hill JA (2000) Anatomic factors associated with recurrent pregnancy loss. Semin Reprod Med 18:341–350

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  14. Ott DJ, Fayez JA, Zagoria RJ (1998) Congenital anomalies. In: Ott DJ, Fayez JA, Zagoria RJ (eds) Hysterosalpingogra-phy: a text and atlas, 2nd ed. Williams & Wilkins, Baltimore, pp 59–69

    Google Scholar 

  15. Toaff ME, Lev-Toaff AS, Toaff R (1984) Communicating uteri: review and classification with introduction of two previously unreported types. Fertil Steril 41:661–679

    CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

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

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  17. Fedele L, Bianchi S (1995) Hysteroscopic metroplasty for septate uterus. Obstet Gynecol Clin North Am 22:473–489

    CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  18. Reuter KL, Daly DC, Cohen SM (1989) Septate versus bicornuate uteri: errors in imaging diagnosis. Radiology 172:749–752

    CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  19. Zreik TG, Troiano RN, Ghoussoub RA et al (1998) Myometrial tissue in uterine septa. Am Assoc Gynecol Laparosc 5:155–160

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  20. Herbst AL, Senekjian EK, Frey KW (1989) Abortion and pregnancy loss among diethylstilbestrol-exposed women. Semin Endocrinol 7:124–129

    Article  Google Scholar 

  21. Goldberg JM, Falcone T (1999) Effect of diethylstilbestrol on reproductive function. Fertil Steril 72:1–7

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  22. Reinhold C, Atri M, Mehio A et al (1995) Diffuse uterine adenomiosis: morphologic criteria and diagnostic accuracy of endovaginal sonography. Radiology 197:609–614

    CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  23. Dueholm M (2006) Transvaginal ultrasound for diagnosis of adenomyosis: a review. Best Pract Res Clin Obstet Gynaecol 20:569–582

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  24. Dueholm M, Lundorf E, Hansen ES et al (2001) Magnetic resonance imaging and transvaginal ultrasonography for diagnosis of adenomyosis. Fertil Steril 76:588–594

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  25. Byun JY, Kim SE, Choi BG et al (1999) Diffuse and focal adenomyosis: MR imaging findings. Radiographics 19: S161–S170

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  26. Reinhold C, Tafazoli F, Mehio A et al (1999) Uterine adenomyosis: endovaginal US and MR imaging features with histopathologic correlation. Radiographics 19:S147–S160

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  27. Reinhold C, Atri M, Mehio A et al (1995) Diffuse uterine adenomyosis: morphologic criteria and diagnostic accuracy of endovaginal sonography. Radiology 197:609–614

    CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  28. Nalaboff KM, Pellerito JS, Ben-Levi E (2001) Imaging the endometrium: disease and normal variants. Radiographics 21:1409–1424

    CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  29. Sivridis E, Giatromanolaki A (2008) The endometrial hyperplasias revisited. Virchows Arch 453:223–231

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  30. Poulsen HE, Taylor CW, Sobin LH (1975) Histological typing of female genital tract tumours. World Health Organization, Geneva

    Google Scholar 

  31. Lacey JV, Chia VM (2009) Review endometrial hyperplasia and the risk of progression to carcinoma. Maturitas 63:39–44

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  32. Goldstein SR (2009) The role of transvaginal ultrasound or endometrial biopsy in the evaluation of the menopausal endometrium. Am J Obstet Gynecol 201:5–11

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  33. Goldstein SR, Monteagudo A, Popiolek D et al (2002) Evaluation of endometrial polyps. Am J Obstet Gynecol 186:669–674

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  34. Hricak H, Tscholakoff D, Heinrichs L et al (1986) Uterine leiomyomas: correlation of MR, histopathologic findings, and symptoms. Radiology 158:385–391

    CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  35. Murase E, Siegelman ES, Outwater EK et al (1999) Uterine leiomyomas: histopathologic features, MR imaging findings, differential diagnosis, and treatment. Radiographics 19:1179–1197

    CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

Download references

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. Dipartimento di Scienze Cliniche, Tecnologiche e Traslazionali Unità Clinico Operativa di Radiologia, Università degli Studi di Trieste, Ospedale di Cattinara, Cattinara

    Maria A. Cova & Leonardo Giarraputo

Authors
  1. Maria A. Cova
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  2. Leonardo Giarraputo
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

Copyright information

© 2010 Springer-Verlag Italia

About this chapter

Cite this chapter

Cova, M.A., Giarraputo, L. (2010). Malformazioni congenite e patologia benigna dell’utero. In: Imaging dell’Apparato Urogenitale. Springer, Milano. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-88-470-1769-6_13

Download citation

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/978-88-470-1769-6_13

  • Publisher Name: Springer, Milano

  • Print ISBN: 978-88-470-1768-9

  • Online ISBN: 978-88-470-1769-6

  • eBook Packages: MedicineMedicine (R0)

Publish with us

Policies and ethics

Search

Navigation