1 Taran FA, Stewart EA, Brucker S. AM: epidemiology, risk factors, clinical phenotype and surgical and interventional alternatives to hysterectomy. Geburtshilfe Frauenheilkd. 2013;73:924–31.
2 Kepkep K, Tuncay YA, Goynumer G, Tutal E. Transvaginal sonography in the diagnosis of adenomyosis: which findings are most accurate? Ultrasound Obstet Gynecol. 2007;30(3):341–5.
3 Champaneria R, Abedin P, Daniels J, Balogun M, Khan KS. Ultrasound scan and magnitude resonance imaging for the diagnosis of adenomyosis: systematic review comparing test accuracy.
Acta Obstet Gynecol Scand. 2010;89(11):1374-84.
4 Van den Bosch T, Dueholm M, Leone FP, Valentin L, Rasmussen CK, Votino A, et al. Terms, definitions and measurements to describe sonographic features of myometrium and uterine masses: a consensus opinion from the Morphological Uterus Sonographic Assessment (MUSA) group. Ultrasound Obstet Gynecol. 2015;46:284–298.
5 PERIC H, FRASER IS. The symptomatology of adenomyosis Best Pract Res Clin Obstet Gynaecol. 2006; 20: 547-555.
6 Vercellini P, Consonni D, Dridi D, Bracco B, Frattaruolo MP, Somigliana E. Uterine adenomyosis and in vitro fertilization outcome: a systematic review and meta-analysis. Hum Reprod. 2014;29:964–977.
7 Naftalin J, Hoo W, Pateman K, Mavrelos D, Foo X, Jurkovic D. Is adenomyosis associated with menorrhagia? Hum Reprod. 2014;29:473–479.
8 Kil K, Chung JE, Pak HJ, Jeung IC, Kim JH, Jo HH, et al Usefulness of CA125 in the differential diagnosis of uterine adenomyosis and myoma. Eur J Obstet Gynecol Reprod Biol. 2015;185:131–5.
9 Graziano A, Lo Monte G, Piva I, Caserta D, Karner M, Engl B, et al. Diagnostic findings in adenomyosis: a pictorial review on the major concerns. Eur J Obstet Gynecol Reprod Biol. 2015; 19(7):1146-54.
10 Bazot M, Daraï E. Role of transvaginal sonography and magnitude resonance imaging in the diagnosis of uterine adenomyosis. Fertil Steril. 2018;109(3):389-397.
11 Haacke EM, Mittal S, Wu Z, Neelavalli J, Cheng YC. Susceptibility-weighted imaging: technical aspects and clinical applications, part 1 [J]. Am J Neuroradiol. 2009;30(1):19-30.
12 Rauscher A, Sedlacik J, Barth M, Mentzel HJ, Reichenbach JR. Magnitude susceptibility-weighted MR phase imaging of the human brain [J]. Am J Neuroradiol. 2005;26(4):736-42.
13 Denk C, Rauscher A. Susceptibility weighted imaging with multiple echoes. J Magn Reson Imaging. 2010 31(1):185-91.
14 Hermier M, Nighoghossian N. Contribution of susceptibility weighted imaging to acute stroke assessment. Stroke 2004; 35: 1989-1994.
15 Gao T, Wang Y, Zhang Z. Silent cerebral microbleeds on susceptibility-weighted imaging of patients with ischemic stroke and leukoaraiosis. Neurol Res.2008;30(3):272-6.
16 Bai Y, Wang MY, Han YH, Dou SW, Lin Q, Guo Y, et al. Susceptibility weighted imaging: a new tool in the diagnosis of prostate cancer and detection of prostatic calcifification. PLoS One 2013;8(1):e53237.
17 Reinhold C, McCarthy S, Bret PM, Mehio A, Atri M, Zakarian R, et al. Diffuse adenomyosis: comparison of endovaginal US and MR imaging with histopathologic correlation.Radiology.1996 199(1):151-8.
18 Goldstein SR, Horii SC, Snyder JR, Raghavendra BN, Subramanyam B. Estimation of nongravid uterine volume based on a nomogram of gravid uterine volume: Its value in gynecologic uterine abnormalities. Obstet Gynecol 1988;72:86–90.
19 Keserci B, Duc NM. Magnetic resonance imaging features influencing high-intensity focused ultrasound ablation of adenomyosis with a nonperfused volume ratio of ≥90% as a measure of clinical treatment success: retrospective multivariate analysis. Int J Hyperthermia.2018 35(1):626-636.
20 Leyendecker G, Bilgicyildirim A, Inacker M, Stalf T, Huppert P, Mall G, et al. Adenomyosis and endometriosis. Re-visiting their association and further insights into the mechanisms of auto-traumatisation. An MRI study. Arch Gynecol Obstet. 2015;291(4): 917–32.
21 Jian-Ying Xin, Shan-Shan Gao, Jin-Gang Liu, Cheng-Feng Sun, Yu Han, Xi-He Sun, et al. The value of ESWAN in diagnosis and differential diagnosis of prostate cancer: Preliminary study: Magnitude Resonance Imaging. 2017: 26–31
22 Vannuccini S, Petraglia F. Recent advances in understanding and managing adenomyosis. F1000Research.2019 8():
23 Vannuccini S, Tosti C, Carmona F, Huang SJ, Chapron C, Guo SW, et al. Pathogenesis of adenomyosis: an update on molecular mechanisms. Reprod Biomed Online. 2017; 35(5): 592–601.
24 Mehasseb MK, Bell SC, Brown L, Pringle JH, Habiba M. Phenotypic haracterization of the inner and outer myometrium in normal and adenomyotic uteri. Gynecol Obstet Invest. 2011 71(4):217-24.
25 Fusi L, Cloke B, Brosens JJ. The uterine junctional zone. Best Pract Res Clin Obstet Gyn-
aecol 2006; 20:479–491.
26 Mehasseb MK, Bell SC, Pringle JH, Habiba MA: Uterine adenomyosis is associated with
ultrastructural features of altered contractility in the inner myometrium. Fertil Steril. 2010 93(7):2130-6.
27 Walsh AJ, Wilman AH. Susceptibility phase imaging with comparison to R2 mapping of iron-rich deep grey matter. Neuroimage.2011 57(2):452-61.