Answers are grounded in this paper and cite their sources.
Case report demonstrates MRI's role in identifying vascular lesions in women post-abortion, indicating significant implications for management.
Uterine arteriovenous malformations (AVMs) and markedly enhanced myometrial vascularity are uncommon but potentially life-threatening causes of abnormal uterine bleeding, particularly after pregnancy-related events or uterine instrumentation. Their recognition is clinically important because repeat blind uterine evacuation may worsen hemorrhage when a high-flow vascular lesion is present. We report the case of a 35-year-old woman, gravida 5 para 5, who presented to the emergency department 10 days after abortion and uterine curettage with recurrent severe metrorrhagia, hemorrhagic shock, and severe anemia with a hemoglobin level of 7 g/dL requiring transfusion. A pelvic MRI was performed for further evaluation. MRI demonstrated heterogeneous fundal intrauterine material compatible with retained products of conception in the appropriate post-abortion context. This material was closely related to an adjacent abnormal fundal intramyometrial vascular area. Dynamic gadolinium-enhanced sequences showed early enhancement of prominent serpiginous vascular structures within the fundal myometrium and adjacent periuterine vascular channels, raising concern for an acquired uterine AVM-like lesion or markedly enhanced myometrial vascularity associated with retained products of conception. Uterine artery embolization was proposed as a fertility-preserving therapeutic option; however, angiographic confirmation, whether this procedure was performed, and post-treatment follow-up were not documented in the available medical record. This case highlights the value of MRI in severe post-abortion bleeding by clarifying the relationship between retained intrauterine tissue and abnormal myometrial vascularity, while emphasizing the need for cautious terminology when angiographic confirmation is unavailable.
No takes yet. Share an insight, caveat, or question.
Choukri et al. (2026) studied this question.
Synapse has enriched 10 related papers. Consider them for comparative context: