COMPARISON OF ULTRASOUND AND HISTOPATHOLOGY IN THE DIAGNOSIS OF ADENOMYOSIS
DOI:
https://doi.org/10.71000/b4g7qe94Keywords:
Adenomyosis, , Histopathology, Abnormal uterine bleeding, Diagnostic accuracy, Predictive value, Transvaginal ultrasonography, Uterine diseasesAbstract
Background: Adenomyosis is a benign gynecological disorder characterized by the invasion of endometrial tissue into the myometrium, often presenting with abnormal uterine bleeding, dysmenorrhea, and infertility. Although histopathology remains the gold standard for diagnosis, its invasive nature limits its use. Transvaginal ultrasound (TVUS) offers a non-invasive, accessible, and cost-effective diagnostic alternative, particularly in low-resource settings.
Objective: This study aimed to compare the diagnostic performance of transvaginal ultrasound with histopathology for detecting adenomyosis and to identify clinical predictors associated with histopathology-confirmed disease.
Methods: A cross-sectional comparative study was conducted among 93 women aged 20–50 years who underwent hysterectomy at the Department of Obstetrics and Gynecology, Mayo Hospital, King Edward Medical University, Lahore, between February and July 2025. All participants underwent preoperative transvaginal ultrasonography, followed by histopathological examination of surgical specimens. Demographic, clinical, and sonographic data were recorded. Diagnostic accuracy indices—sensitivity, specificity, positive predictive value (PPV), negative predictive value (NPV), and overall accuracy—were calculated using histopathology as the gold standard. Logistic regression analysis was performed to identify significant predictors of adenomyosis.
Results: The mean age of participants was 41.8 ± 6.9 years, with most being multiparous (75.3%) and premenopausal (62.4%). Abnormal uterine bleeding was reported in 69.9% of women, followed by dysmenorrhea in 55.9%. Histopathology confirmed adenomyosis in 53 (57.0%) cases. Ultrasound demonstrated a sensitivity of 86.8%, specificity of 70.0%, PPV of 79.3%, NPV of 80.0%, and overall diagnostic accuracy of 79.6%. Logistic regression identified positive ultrasound findings (OR = 8.15, p < 0.001), abnormal uterine bleeding (OR = 3.49, p = 0.005), parity ≥3 (OR = 2.48, p = 0.021), and age ≥40 years (OR = 2.32, p = 0.038) as independent predictors of histopathology-confirmed adenomyosis.
Conclusion: Transvaginal ultrasound provides high diagnostic sensitivity and acceptable specificity for detecting adenomyosis and is especially effective in multiparous, premenopausal women with abnormal uterine bleeding. While histopathology remains definitive, ultrasound serves as a reliable, non-invasive, and cost-effective first-line diagnostic modality in routine clinical practice.
References
Celli V, Dolciami M, Ninkova R, Ercolani G, Rizzo S, Porpora MG, Catalano C, Manganaro L. MRI and adenomyosis: What can radiologists evaluate? Int J Environ Res Public Health. 2022;19(10):5840.
Chapron C, Vannuccini S, Santulli P, Abrão MS, Carmona F, Fraser IS, Gordts S, Guo S, Just P, Noël J, Pistofidis G, Bosch TV den, Petraglia F. Diagnosing adenomyosis: an integrated clinical and imaging approach. Hum Reprod Update. 2020;26(3):392.
Moawad G, Fruscalzo A, Youssef Y, Kheil M, Tawil T, Nehme J, Pirtea P, Guani B, Afaneh H, Ayoubi JM, Féki A. Adenomyosis: An updated review on diagnosis and classification. J Clin Med. 2023;12(14):4828.
Πρωτόπαπας Α, Grimbizis G, Athanasiou S, Loutradis D. Adenomyosis: Disease, uterine aging process leading to symptoms, or both? PubMed. 2020;12(2):91.
Celli, I., & Habiba, M. (2021). Ultrasound in the diagnosis of adenomyosis: A review. Journal of Obstetrics and Gynaecology, 41(3), 345-352.
Tanta Medical Journal. (2024). Comparative study of ultrasound and histopathology in diagnosing adenomyosis. Tanta Medical Journal, 52(1), 15-22.
ACOG. (2021). Practice Bulletin No. 228: Diagnosis of Adenomyosis. Obstetrics & Gynecology, 138(5), e1-e12.
ESHRE. (2022). Guidelines for the diagnosis and management of adenomyosis. Human Reproduction Open, 2022(1), hoab001.
Khan, K. N., Fujishita, A., & Kitawaki, J. (2021). Advances in ultrasound imaging for the diagnosis of adenomyosis. Journal of Obstetrics and Gynaecology Research, 47(5), 1620-1628.
Zhang, Y., Wang, Y., & Zhang, Y. (2020). The role of transvaginal ultrasound in the diagnosis of adenomyosis: A systematic review and meta-analysis. Ultrasound in Obstetrics & Gynecology, 55(4), 487-494.
Gonzalez, M. A., et al. (2021). Risks and complications of hysterectomy: A review. Journal of Obstetrics and Gynaecology, 41(2), 123-130.
Vercellini, P., et al. (2020). Adenomyosis: Epidemiology and clinical management. The Lancet, 395(10224), 123-134.
Li, Y., Zhang, Y., & Wang, Y. (2022). The role of artificial intelligence in the diagnosis of adenomyosis using ultrasound: A systematic review. Ultrasound in Obstetrics & Gynecology, 60(3), 345-353.
Bai J, Li N, Ye H, Li X, Chen L, Hu J, et al. AI-assisted cervical cytology precancerous screening for high-risk population in resource-limited regions using a compact microscope. Nat Commun. 2025;16(1):7429.
Bai X, Wei J, Starr D, Zhang X, Wu X, Guo Y, et al. Assessment of Efficacy and Accuracy of Cervical Cytology Screening With Artificial Intelligence Assistive System. Mod Pathol. 2024;37(6):100486.
Karimi M, Alizadeh A, Mahmoodi M. Clinicopathological Pattern of Endometrial Specimens in Women with Abnormal Uterine Bleeding and Ultrasonography Correlation. Arch Iran Med. 2024;27(4):216-22.
Fell C, Mohammadi M, Morrison D, Arandjelović O, Syed S, Konanahalli P, et al. Detection of malignancy in whole slide images of endometrial cancer biopsies using artificial intelligence. PLoS One. 2023;18(3):e0282577.
Ghani MA, Liau J, Eskander R, Mell L, Yusufaly T, Obrzut S. Imaging Biomarkers and Liquid Biopsy in Assessment of Cervical Cancer. J Comput Assist Tomogr. 2022;46(5):707-15.
Shen Y, Yang W, Liu J, Zhang Y. Minimally invasive approaches for the early detection of endometrial cancer. Mol Cancer. 2023;22(1):53.
Borčinová M, Köhler C, Němejcová K, Zapardiel I, Klát J, Frühauf F, et al. Preoperative tumour size assessment in patients with early-stage cervical cancer: Final results of the SENTIX study. Gynecol Oncol. 2025;196:160-7.
La Frinere-Sandoval Q, Cubbin C, DiNitto DM. Racial and ethnic disparities in cervical and breast cancer screenings by nativity and length of U.S. residence. Ethn Health. 2023;28(6):895-911.
DeJong SR, Bakkum-Gamez JN, Clayton AC, Henry MR, Keeney GL, Zhang J, et al. Tao brush endometrial cytology is a sensitive diagnostic tool for cancer and hyperplasia among women presenting to clinic with abnormal uterine bleeding. Cancer Med. 2021;10(20):7040-7.
Rolnik DL, Raymond Y, Lee T, Ramkrishna J, da Silva Costa F, Menezes M, et al. Uterine fibroids and non-informative cell-free DNA screening results. Ultrasound Obstet Gynecol. 2024;64(4):463-9.
Downloads
Published
Issue
Section
License
Copyright (c) 2025 Madeeha Arshad, Khadeeja Nasir, Aqsa Shahid (Author)

This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial-NoDerivatives 4.0 International License.





