Abstract:Study question: Is there an ideal imaging modality for the detection of uterosacral ligaments/torus uterinus (USL), rectovaginal septum (RVS) and vaginal deep endometriosis (DE) in women with a clinical history of endometriosis? Summary answer: The sensitivity for the detection of USL, RVS and vaginal DE using MRI seems to be better than transvaginal ultrasonography (TVS), whilst the specificity of both were excellent. What is known already: The surgical management of women with DE can be complex and requires advanced laparoscopic skills with maximal cytoreduction being vital at the first procedure to provide the greatest symptomatic benefit. Owing to a correlation of TVS findings with surgical findings, preoperative imaging has been used to adequately consent women and plan the appropriate surgery. However, until publication of the consensus statement by the International Deep Endometriosis Analysis Group in 2016, there were significant variations within the terms and definitions used to describe DE in the pelvis. Study design size duration: A systematic review and meta-analysis was conducted using Embase, Google Scholar, Medline, PubMed and Scopus to identify studies published from inception to May 2020, of which only those from 2010 were included owing to the increased proficiency of the sonographers and advancements in technology. Participants/materials setting methods: All prospective studies that preoperatively assessed any imaging modality for the detection of DE in the USL, RVS and vagina and correlated with the reference standard of surgical data were considered eligible. Study eligibility was restricted to those including a minimum of 10 unaffected and 10 affected participants. Main results and the role of chance: There were 1977 references identified from which 10 studies (n = 1188) were included in the final analysis. For the detection of USL DE, the overall pooled sensitivity and specificity for all TVS techniques were 60% (95% CI 32-82%) and 95% (95% CI 90-98%), respectively, and for all MRI techniques were 81% (95% CI 66-90%) and 83% (95% CI 62-94%), respectively. For the detection of RVS DE, the overall pooled sensitivity and specificity for all TVS techniques were 57% (95% CI 30-80%) and 100% (95% CI 92-100%), respectively. For the detection of vaginal DE, the overall pooled sensitivity and specificity for all TVS techniques were 52% (95% CI 29-74%) and 98% (95% CI 95-99%), respectively, and for all MRI techniques were 64% (95% CI 40-83%) and 98% (96% CI 93-99%). Pooled analyses were not possible for other imaging modalities. Limitations reasons for caution: There was a low quality of evidence given the high risk of bias and heterogeneity in the included studies. There are also potential biases secondary to the risk of misdiagnosis at surgery owing to a lack of either histopathological findings or expertise, coupled with the surgeons not being blinded. Furthermore, the varying surgical experience and the lack of clarity regarding complete surgical clearance, thereby also contributing to the lack of histopathology, could also explain the wide range of pre-test probability of disease. Wider implications of the findings: MRI outperformed TVS for the per-operative diagnosis of USL, RVS and vaginal DE with higher sensitivities, although the specificities for both were excellent. There were improved results with other imaging modalities, such as rectal endoscopy-sonography, as well as the addition of bowel preparation or ultrasound gel to either TVS or MRI, although these are based on individual studies. Study funding/competing interests: No funding was received for this study. M.L. reports personal fees from GE Healthcare, grants from the Australian Women's and Children's Foundation, outside the submitted work. B.W.M. reports grants from NHMRC, outside the submitted work. G.C. reports personal fees from GE Healthcare, outside the submitted work; and is on the Endometriosis Advisory Board for Roche Diagnostics. Registration number: Prospective registration with PROSPERO (CRD42017059872) was obtained.

Reasons why it is time to change imaging guidelines on endometriosis

Noninvasive diagnostic imaging for endometriosis part 2: a systematic review of recent developments in magnetic resonance imaging, nuclear medicine and computed tomography

Noninvasive diagnostic imaging for endometriosis part 1: a systematic review of recent developments in ultrasound, combination imaging, and artificial intelligence

Radiology State-of-the-art Review: Endometriosis Imaging Interpretation and Reporting

MRI of endometriosis in correlation with the #Enzian classification: applicability and structured report

Transvaginal ultrasound and magnetic resonance imaging in the diagnosis of endometrioma: a systematic review and meta-analysis of diagnostic test accuracy studies

Best Practices: Ultrasound Versus MRI in the Assessment of Pelvic Endometriosis

Indirect and atypical imaging signals of endometriosis: A wide range of manifestations

Meta-analysis and systematic review to determine the optimal imaging modality for the detection of uterosacral ligaments/torus uterinus, rectovaginal septum and vaginal deep endometriosis

Expert opinion on the use of transvaginal sonography for presurgical staging and classification of endometriosis

MRI for endometriosis in adolescent patients

Integration of MRI for detection and surgical planning of advanced endometriosis

Staging, recurrence and follow-up of uterine cervical cancer using MRI: Updated Guidelines of the European Society of Urogenital Radiology after revised FIGO staging 2018

Non-invasive imaging techniques for diagnosis of pelvic deep endometriosis and endometriosis classification systems: An International Consensus Statement

Diagnosis of endometriosis with imaging: a review

Magnetic Resonance Imaging of Gynecological Malignancies: Role in Personalized Management

Continued improvement to imaging diagnosis and treatment triage of endometriosis: The role of the multi-disciplinary conference

Magnetic resonance imaging classification of deep pelvic endometriosis: description and impact on surgical management

The clinical importance of Magnetic Resonance Imaging with Diffusion weighted images in diagnosis and treatment planning of endometriosis.

Imaging of peritoneal metastases of ovarian and colorectal cancer: joint recommendations of ESGAR, ESUR, PSOGI, and EANM

Transvaginal Ultrasound vs. Magnetic Resonance Imaging (MRI) Value in Endometriosis Diagnosis