xvi Table 2.S5 Study Results of Diagnostic Accuracy Studies Author, Year Outcomes Measured Adenomyosis MRI Results for the population Number of positive MRI diagnoses Number of positive histopathology diagnoses Diagnostic Accuracy Results Ascher et al. 1994 Presence adenomyosis, type of adenomyosis NR 15 17 NR. Calculated by reviewer after constructing 2 x 2 tables based on information provided in the paper. Can be found in the RevMan forest plots from page 43 onwards. Badawy et al. 2014 Diagnostic accuracy of MRI for various uterine lesions after unclear TVUS/HSG Diffuse: n= 14 Adenomyomas: n= 3 17 17 Accuracy: 100%, Sensitivity 100%, Specificity 100%, PPV 100%, NPV 100% Bazot et al. 2001 Presence of adenomyosis, adenomyosis type NR NR 40 Homogenous uterine enlargement: Accuracy 72.5%. Sensitivity 22.5%, Specificity 97.5%, PPV 81.8%, NPV 72.5%, HSI foci: Accuracy: 81.7% Sensitivity 47.5%, Specificity 98.8%, PPV 95.0%, NPV 79.0% JZ>12mm: Accuracy 85.0% Sensitivity 62.5%, Specificity 96.3%, PPV 89.3%, NPV 83.7%, JZ/Myometrium ratio: Accuracy 83.3% Sensitivity 65.0%, Specificity 92.5%, PPV 81.3%, NPV 84.0%, Combination: Accuracy 87.5% Sensitivity 77.5%, Specificity 92.5%, PPV 83.8%, NPV 89.2%, Bazot et al. 2003* Accuracy of diagnosis using different MRI techniques and reviewers 16.7% adenomyoma 62.5% diffuse adenomyosis, 37.5% focal adenomyosis NR 24 (42.9%) Accuracy 83.9%. Sensitivity 75%, Specificity 90.6%, PPV 85.7%, NPV 82.8%,
RkJQdWJsaXNoZXIy MTk4NDMw