Which of the following answer choices do not correlate with the appropriate signal characteristics?

Question:

	1. Subacute blood products demonstrate heterogeneous T2 signal and T1 hyperintensity.
	2. Chronic blood products demonstrate T1 hypointensity.
	3. Acute hematosalpinx is demonstrated as hypointense T1 and hyperintense T2 signal.
	4. High T2 signal extending from the vaginal fornix into a normal appearing cervix and uterine horn can confirm patency of the uterus.
	5. The abnormal uterine segment can end in intermediate signal.

Answer:

The correct answer for the question "Which of the following answer choices do not correlate with the appropriate signal characteristics?" is:

3. Acute hematosalpinx is demonstrated as hypointense T1 and hyperintense T2 signal.

Explanation
Subacute blood products are seen as heterogeneous T2 signal and T1 hyperintensity.

Chronic blood products are seen as a T1 hypointense signal.

Hematosalpinx is demonstrated as a hyperintense T1 and hyperintense T2 signal.

Patency of the uterus can be confirmed with a high T2 signal extending from the vaginal fornix into a normal appearing cervix and uterine horn.

If there is a uterine abnormality, the uterine segment may be seen as an intermediate signal.

From the manuscript:
Uterus didelphys with unilateral distal vaginal agenesis and ipsilateral renal agenesis: Common presentation of an unusual variation
Radiology Case. 2011 Jan; 5(1):1-8

This article belongs to the OB/GYN section.

From the manuscript

Uterus didelphys with unilateral distal vaginal agenesis and ipsilateral renal agenesis: Common presentation of an unusual variation

Free full text article: Uterus didelphys with unilateral distal vaginal agenesis and ipsilateral renal agenesis: Common presentation of an unusual variation

Abstract
Mullerian duct abnormalities are congenital malformations that are easily missed and can lead to incorrect diagnosis and unnecessary operative procedures. In this case, a young female presented with cyclic pelvic pain that continued after previous surgical resection of an ovarian cyst. Further investigation with clinical examinations and multimodality imaging demonstrated ipsilateral renal agenesis and a Class III Mullerian duct anomaly (MDA) requiring a second operative procedure. It is believed that this case is a variant of the described obstructed hemi-vagina with ipsilateral renal agenesis (OVIRA) anomaly as pathologically there was ipsilateral renal agenesis and complete vaginal agenesis in our case. It is imperative to have a high clinical suspicion of mullerian duct abnormalities when encountering a patient with other urogenital anomalies. This will decrease the amount of misdiagnoses, guide appropriate surgical intervention, and decrease the risk of future reproductive complications.

References

1. Troiano RN, McCarthy SM. Müllerian duct anomalies: imaging and clinical issues. Radiology 2004; 233 (1)1:19-34.
Find similar topics on