AC Search
Document Navigator

Postmenopausal Acute Pelvic Pain

Variant: 1   Postmenopausal acute pelvic pain. Initial imaging.
Procedure Appropriateness Category Relative Radiation Level
US pelvis transabdominal Usually Appropriate O
US pelvis transvaginal Usually Appropriate O
CT abdomen and pelvis with IV contrast Usually Appropriate ☢☢☢
MRI pelvis without and with IV contrast May Be Appropriate O
MRI pelvis without IV contrast May Be Appropriate O
CT abdomen and pelvis without IV contrast May Be Appropriate ☢☢☢
CT abdomen and pelvis without and with IV contrast Usually Not Appropriate ☢☢☢☢

Panel Members
Summary of Literature Review
Introduction/Background
Initial Imaging Definition

Initial imaging is defined as imaging at the beginning of the care episode for the medical condition defined by the variant. More than one procedure can be considered usually appropriate in the initial imaging evaluation when:

  • There are procedures that are equivalent alternatives (ie, only one procedure will be ordered to provide the clinical information to effectively manage the patient’s care)

OR

  • There are complementary procedures (ie, more than one procedure is ordered as a set or simultaneously wherein each procedure provides unique clinical information to effectively manage the patient’s care).
Discussion of Procedures by Variant
Variant 1: Postmenopausal acute pelvic pain. Initial imaging.
Variant 1: Postmenopausal acute pelvic pain. Initial imaging.
A. CT Abdomen and Pelvis
Variant 1: Postmenopausal acute pelvic pain. Initial imaging.
B. MRI Pelvis
Variant 1: Postmenopausal acute pelvic pain. Initial imaging.
C. US Pelvis Transabdominal
Variant 1: Postmenopausal acute pelvic pain. Initial imaging.
D. US Pelvis Transvaginal
Summary of Recommendations
Supporting Documents

The evidence table, literature search, and appendix for this topic are available at https://acsearch.acr.org/list. The appendix includes the strength of evidence assessment and the final rating round tabulations for each recommendation.

For additional information on the Appropriateness Criteria methodology and other supporting documents, please go to the ACR website at https://www.acr.org/Clinical-Resources/Clinical-Tools-and-Reference/Appropriateness-Criteria.

Appropriateness Category Names and Definitions

Appropriateness Category Name

Appropriateness Rating

Appropriateness Category Definition

Usually Appropriate

7, 8, or 9

The imaging procedure or treatment is indicated in the specified clinical scenarios at a favorable risk-benefit ratio for patients.

May Be Appropriate

4, 5, or 6

The imaging procedure or treatment may be indicated in the specified clinical scenarios as an alternative to imaging procedures or treatments with a more favorable risk-benefit ratio, or the risk-benefit ratio for patients is equivocal.

May Be Appropriate (Disagreement)

5

The individual ratings are too dispersed from the panel median. The different label provides transparency regarding the panel’s recommendation. “May be appropriate” is the rating category and a rating of 5 is assigned.

Usually Not Appropriate

1, 2, or 3

The imaging procedure or treatment is unlikely to be indicated in the specified clinical scenarios, or the risk-benefit ratio for patients is likely to be unfavorable.
Relative Radiation Level Information
References
1. Allison SO, Lev-Toaff AS. Acute pelvic pain: what we have learned from the ER. ULTRASOUND Q.. 26(4):211-8, 2010 Dec.
2. Bhosale PR, Javitt MC, Atri M, et al. ACR Appropriateness Criteria R Acute Pelvic Pain in the Reproductive Age Group. Ultrasound Quarterly. 32(2):108-15, 2016 Jun.ULTRASOUND Q.. 32(2):108-15, 2016 Jun.
3. Kurt S, Uyar I, Demirtas O, Celikel E, Beyan E, Tasyurt A. Acute pelvic pain: evaluation of 503 cases. Arch Iran Med. 16(7):397-400, 2013 Jul.
4. Amirbekian S, Hooley RJ. Ultrasound evaluation of pelvic pain. [Review]. Radiol Clin North Am. 52(6):1215-35, 2014 Nov.
5. Lameris W, van Randen A, van Es HW, et al. Imaging strategies for detection of urgent conditions in patients with acute abdominal pain: diagnostic accuracy study. BMJ. 2009;338:b2431.
6. Perry H, Foley KG, Witherspoon J, et al. Relative accuracy of emergency CT in adults with non-traumatic abdominal pain. British Journal of Radiology. 89(1059):20150416, 2016.
7. Martin JF, Mathison DJ, Mullan PC, Otero HJ. Secondary imaging for suspected appendicitis after equivocal ultrasound: time to disposition of MRI compared to CT. EMERG. RADIOL.. 25(2):161-168, 2018 Apr.
8. Asch E, Shah S, Kang T, Levine D. Use of pelvic computed tomography and sonography in women of reproductive age in the emergency department. Journal of Ultrasound in Medicine. 32(7):1181-7, 2013 Jul.
9. Patel MD, Ascher SM, Paspulati RM, et al. Managing incidental findings on abdominal and pelvic CT and MRI, part 1: white paper of the ACR Incidental Findings Committee II on adnexal findings. J. Am. Coll. Radiol.. 10(9):675-81, 2013 Sep.
10. Boos J, Brook OR, Fang J, Brook A, Levine D. Ovarian Cancer: Prevalence in Incidental Simple Adnexal Cysts Initially Identified in CT Examinations of the Abdomen and Pelvis. Radiology. 286(1):196-204, 2018 01.
11. Pickhardt PJ, Hanson ME. Incidental adnexal masses detected at low-dose unenhanced CT in asymptomatic women age 50 and older: implications for clinical management and ovarian cancer screening. Radiology 2010;257:144-50.
12. Iraha Y, Okada M, Iraha R, et al. CT and MR Imaging of Gynecologic Emergencies. [Review]. Radiographics. 37(5):1569-1586, 2017 Sep-Oct.
13. Ssi-Yan-Kai G, Rivain AL, Trichot C, et al. What every radiologist should know about adnexal torsion. [Review]. EMERG. RADIOL.. 25(1):51-59, 2018 Feb.
14. Rha SE, Byun JY, Jung SE, et al. CT and MR imaging features of adnexal torsion. Radiographics. 2002;22(2):283-294.
15. Dhanda S, Quek ST, Ting MY, et al. CT features in surgically proven cases of ovarian torsion-a pictorial review. British Journal of Radiology. 90(1078):20170052, 2017 Oct.Br J Radiol. 90(1078):20170052, 2017 Oct.
16. Duigenan S, Oliva E, Lee SI. Ovarian torsion: diagnostic features on CT and MRI with pathologic correlation. AJR Am J Roentgenol. 2012;198(2):W122-131.
17. Roy C, Bierry G, El Ghali S, Buy X, Rossini A. Acute torsion of uterine leiomyoma: CT features. Abdom Imaging. 30(1):120-3, 2005 Jan-Feb.
18. Ohgiya Y, Seino N, Miyamoto S, et al. CT features for diagnosing acute torsion of uterine subserosal leiomyoma. Jpn J Radiol. 36(3):209-214, 2018 Mar.
19. Murase E, Siegelman ES, Outwater EK, Perez-Jaffe LA, Tureck RW. Uterine leiomyomas: histopathologic features, MR imaging findings, differential diagnosis, and treatment. Radiographics. 19(5):1179-97, 1999 Sep-Oct.
20. Revzin MV, Mathur M, Dave HB, Macer ML, Spektor M. Pelvic Inflammatory Disease: Multimodality Imaging Approach with Clinical-Pathologic Correlation. [Review]. Radiographics. 36(5):1579-96, 2016 Sep-Oct.
21. Siddall KA, Rubens DJ. Multidetector CT of the female pelvis. [Review] [65 refs]. Radiol Clin North Am. 43(6):1097-118, ix, 2005 Nov.
22. Kalish GM, Patel MD, Gunn ML, Dubinsky TJ. Computed tomographic and magnetic resonance features of gynecologic abnormalities in women presenting with acute or chronic abdominal pain. [Review] [52 refs]. ULTRASOUND Q.. 23(3):167-75, 2007 Sep.
23. Wilbur AC, Aizenstein RI, Napp TE. CT findings in tuboovarian abscess. AJR Am J Roentgenol. 158(3):575-9, 1992 Mar.
24. Kassam Z, Petkovska I, Wang CL, Trinh AM, Kamaya A. Benign Gynecologic Conditions of the Uterus. [Review]. Magn Reson Imaging Clin N Am. 25(3):577-600, 2017 Aug.
25. Forstner R, Thomassin-Naggara I, Cunha TM, et al. ESUR recommendations for MR imaging of the sonographically indeterminate adnexal mass: an update. Eur Radiol. 27(6):2248-2257, 2017 Jun.
26. Atri M, Alabousi A, Reinhold C, et al. ACR Appropriateness Criteria® Clinically Suspected Adnexal Mass, No Acute Symptoms. J Am Coll Radiol 2019;16:S77-S93.
27. Beranger-Gibert S, Lagadec M, Boulay-Coletta I, et al. Hepatic and perihepatic involvement of female genital diseases and pregnancy: a review. [Review]. Abdom Imaging. 40(5):1331-49, 2015 Jun.
28. Beranger-Gibert S, Sakly H, Ballester M, et al. Diagnostic Value of MR Imaging in the Diagnosis of Adnexal Torsion. Radiology. 279(2):461-70, 2016 May.
29. Singh AK, Desai H, Novelline RA. Emergency MRI of acute pelvic pain: MR protocol with no oral contrast. Emerg Radiol. 2009 Mar;16(2):133-41.
30. Lourenco AP, Swenson D, Tubbs RJ, Lazarus E. Ovarian and tubal torsion: imaging findings on US, CT, and MRI. [Review]. EMERG. RADIOL.. 21(2):179-87, 2014 Apr.
31. Verma SK, Bergin D, Gonsalves CF, Mitchell DG, Lev-Toaff AS, Parker L. Submucosal fibroids becoming endocavitary following uterine artery embolization: risk assessment by MRI. AJR Am J Roentgenol. 190(5):1220-6, 2008 May.
32. Deshmukh SP, Gonsalves CF, Guglielmo FF, Mitchell DG. Role of MR imaging of uterine leiomyomas before and after embolization. [Review]. Radiographics. 32(6):E251-81, 2012 Oct.
33. Kubik-Huch RA, Weston M, Nougaret S, et al. European Society of Urogenital Radiology (ESUR) Guidelines: MR Imaging of Leiomyomas. Eur Radiol. 28(8):3125-3137, 2018 Aug.
34. Czeyda-Pommersheim F, Kalb B, Costello J, et al. MRI in pelvic inflammatory disease: a pictorial review. [Review]. Abdom Radiol. 42(3):935-950, 2017 03.
35. Knoepp US, Mazza MB, Chong ST, Wasnik AP. MR Imaging of Pelvic Emergencies in Women. [Review]. Magn Reson Imaging Clin N Am. 25(3):503-519, 2017 Aug.
36. Valentini AL, Speca S, Gui B, Soglia G, Micco M, Bonomo L. Adenomyosis: from the sign to the diagnosis. Imaging, diagnostic pitfalls and differential diagnosis: a pictorial review. [Review][Erratum appears in Radiol Med. 2011 Dec;116(8):1314 Note: Soglia, B G [corrected to Soglia, G]]. Radiol Med (Torino). 116(8):1267-87, 2011 Dec.
37. American College of Radiology. ACR-ACOG-AIUM-SRU Practice Parameter for the Performance of Ultrasound of the Female Pelvis. Available at: https://www.acr.org/-/media/ACR/Files/Practice-Parameters/US-Pelvis.pdf?la=en. April 2, 2019
38. Vandermeer FQ, Wong-You-Cheong JJ. Imaging of acute pelvic pain. [Review] [30 refs][Reprint in Top Magn Reson Imaging. 2010 Jul;21(4):201-11; PMID: 22082769]. Clin Obstet Gynecol. 52(1):2-20, 2009 Mar.
39. Cicchiello LA, Hamper UM, Scoutt LM. Ultrasound evaluation of gynecologic causes of pelvic pain. Obstet Gynecol Clin North Am. 2011;38(1):85-114, viii.
40. Gentry-Maharaj A, Sharma A, Burnell M, et al. Acceptance of transvaginal sonography by postmenopausal women participating in the United Kingdom Collaborative Trial of Ovarian Cancer Screening. Ultrasound Obstet Gynecol. 41(1):73-9, 2013 Jan.
41. Valentin L, Ameye L, Franchi D, et al. Risk of malignancy in unilocular cysts: a study of 1148 adnexal masses classified as unilocular cysts at transvaginal ultrasound and review of the literature. [Review]. Ultrasound Obstet Gynecol. 41(1):80-9, 2013 Jan.
42. Baheti AD, Lewis CE, Hippe DS, O'Malley RB, Wang CL. Adnexal lesions detected on CT in postmenopausal females with non-ovarian malignancy: do simple cysts need follow-up?. Abdom Radiol. 44(2):661-668, 2019 02.
43. Nohuz E, De Simone L, Chene G. Reliability of IOTA score and ADNEX model in the screening of ovarian malignancy in postmenopausal women. Journal of Gynecology Obstetrics and Human Reproduction. 48(2):103-107, 2019 Feb.
44. Van Calster B, Van Hoorde K, Valentin L, et al. Evaluating the risk of ovarian cancer before surgery using the ADNEX model to differentiate between benign, borderline, early and advanced stage invasive, and secondary metastatic tumours: prospective multicentre diagnostic study. BMJ. 349:g5920, 2014 Oct 15.
45. Kamaya A, Shin L, Chen B, Desser TS. Emergency gynecologic imaging. [Review] [68 refs][Erratum appears in Semin Ultrasound CT MR. 2008 Dec;29(6):491]. Semin Ultrasound CT MR. 29(5):353-68, 2008 Oct.
46. Eitan R, Galoyan N, Zuckerman B, Shaya M, Shen O, Beller U. The risk of malignancy in post-menopausal women presenting with adnexal torsion. Gynecol Oncol. 106(1):211-4, 2007 Jul.
47. Lee EJ, Kwon HC, Joo HJ, Suh JH, Fleischer AC. Diagnosis of ovarian torsion with color Doppler sonography: depiction of twisted vascular pedicle. J Ultrasound Med. 17(2):83-9, 1998 Feb.
48. Nizar K, Deutsch M, Filmer S, Weizman B, Beloosesky R, Weiner Z. Doppler studies of the ovarian venous blood flow in the diagnosis of adnexal torsion. J Clin Ultrasound. 37(8):436-9, 2009 Oct.
49. Chiou SY, Lev-Toaff AS, Masuda E, Feld RI, Bergin D. Adnexal torsion: new clinical and imaging observations by sonography, computed tomography, and magnetic resonance imaging. J Ultrasound Med. 2007;26(10):1289-1301.
50. Donnez J, Dolmans MM. Uterine fibroid management: from the present to the future. [Review]. Human Reproduction Update. 22(6):665-686, 2016 11.Hum Reprod Update. 22(6):665-686, 2016 11.
51. De La Cruz MS, Buchanan EM. Uterine Fibroids: Diagnosis and Treatment. [Review]. Am Fam Physician. 95(2):100-107, 2017 Jan 15.
52. Ghai S, Rajan DK, Benjamin MS, Asch MR, Ghai S, Uterine artery embolization for leiomyomas: pre- and postprocedural evaluation with US. [Review] [60 refs]. Radiographics. 25(5):1159-72; discussion 1173-6, 2005 Sep-Oct.
53. Patten RM, Vincent LM, Wolner-Hanssen P, Thorpe E Jr. Pelvic inflammatory disease. Endovaginal sonography with laparoscopic correlation. J Ultrasound Med. 9(12):681-9, 1990 Dec.
54. Patel MD, Dubinsky TJ. Reimaging the female pelvis with ultrasound after CT: general principles. Ultrasound Q. 2007;23(3):177-187.
55. Yitta S, Mausner EV, Kim A, et al. Pelvic ultrasound immediately following MDCT in female patients with abdominal/pelvic pain: is it always necessary? Emerg Radiol. 2011;18(5):371-380.
56. American College of Radiology. ACR Appropriateness Criteria® Radiation Dose Assessment Introduction. Available at: https://edge.sitecorecloud.io/americancoldf5f-acrorgf92a-productioncb02-3650/media/ACR/Files/Clinical/Appropriateness-Criteria/ACR-Appropriateness-Criteria-Radiation-Dose-Assessment-Introduction.pdf.
Disclaimer

The ACR Committee on Appropriateness Criteria and its expert panels have developed criteria for determining appropriate imaging examinations for diagnosis and treatment of specified medical condition(s). These criteria are intended to guide radiologists, radiation oncologists and referring physicians in making decisions regarding radiologic imaging and treatment. Generally, the complexity and severity of a patient’s clinical condition should dictate the selection of appropriate imaging procedures or treatments. Only those examinations generally used for evaluation of the patient’s condition are ranked. Other imaging studies necessary to evaluate other co-existent diseases or other medical consequences of this condition are not considered in this document. The availability of equipment or personnel may influence the selection of appropriate imaging procedures or treatments. Imaging techniques classified as investigational by the FDA have not been considered in developing these criteria; however, study of new equipment and applications should be encouraged. The ultimate decision regarding the appropriateness of any specific radiologic examination or treatment must be made by the referring physician and radiologist in light of all the circumstances presented in an individual examination.