Exploring pathophysiological insights to improve diagnostic utility of ultrasound markers for distinguishing placenta accreta spectrum from uterine-scar dehiscence.

IF 6.1 1区 医学 Q1 ACOUSTICS Ultrasound in Obstetrics & Gynecology Pub Date : 2024-12-15 DOI:10.1002/uog.29144
T Adu-Bredu, R A Aryananda, S Mathewlynn, S L Collins
{"title":"Exploring pathophysiological insights to improve diagnostic utility of ultrasound markers for distinguishing placenta accreta spectrum from uterine-scar dehiscence.","authors":"T Adu-Bredu, R A Aryananda, S Mathewlynn, S L Collins","doi":"10.1002/uog.29144","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Objective: </strong>Accurate differentiation between placenta accreta spectrum (PAS) and uterine-scar dehiscence with underlying non-adherent placenta is often challenging, even for PAS experts, both prenatally and intraoperatively. We investigated the use of standardized two-dimensional grayscale ultrasound and Doppler imaging markers in differentiating between these closely related, yet distinct, conditions.</p><p><strong>Methods: </strong>This was a retrospective cohort study conducted in two centers with specialized PAS services. All consecutive women with at least one previous Cesarean delivery and a current pregnancy with a low-lying placenta or placenta previa, for whom detailed prenatal ultrasound, management and outcome information was available for review by the research team, were included. PAS was diagnosed clinically by the abnormal adherence of the placenta to the uterus. The PAS cases were classified using the International Federation of Gynecology and Obstetrics clinical classification. Grade 1 was considered low-grade PAS while Grades 2 and 3 were classified as high-grade PAS. The ultrasound markers were categorized according to their underlying pathophysiology, including lower uterine segment (LUS) remodeling, uteroplacental vascular remodeling and serosal hypervascularity. The combined ultrasound features were analyzed among the PAS and non-PAS subgroups using the chi-square test or Fisher's exact test, and univariable and multivariable logistic regression analysis. Additionally, receiver-operating-characteristics (ROC) curves were used to evaluate the diagnostic accuracy of the combined ultrasound features in differentiating between high-grade PAS and uterine-scar dehiscence.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>Out of the 150 cases retrieved, six cases were excluded for not meeting the eligibility criteria. The included 144 cases comprised 89 cases of PAS, 23 cases of uterine-scar dehiscence and 32 cases of uncomplicated low-lying placenta or placenta previa. Among the PAS cases, there were 16 cases of low-grade PAS and 73 of high-grade PAS. Combined signs of LUS remodeling were present in most cases of uterine-scar dehiscence (20/23 (87.0%)) and high-grade PAS (67/73 (91.8%)) (P = 0.444), while these signs were absent in cases of low-grade PAS (0/16) and uncomplicated low-lying placenta or placenta previa (0/32). A subgroup analysis of cases with all LUS remodeling features present revealed that the combined signs of serosal hypervascularity (adjusted odds ratio (aOR), 41.2 (95% CI, 7.5-225.3)) and uteroplacental vascular remodeling (aOR, 116.0 (95% CI, 15.3-878.3)) were significantly associated with high-grade PAS. Diagnostic accuracy testing within this subgroup revealed an area under the ROC curve (AUC) of 0.90 (95% CI, 0.81-0.99), sensitivity of 89.6% (95% CI, 79.7-95.7%) and specificity of 90.0% (95% CI, 68.3-98.8%) for the diagnosis of high-grade PAS when all signs of uteroplacental vascular remodeling were present. If both signs of serosal hypervascularity were present, the AUC was 0.84 (95% CI, 0.74-0.95) with a sensitivity of 83.6% (95% CI, 72.5-91.5%) and specificity of 85.0% (95% CI, 62.1-96.8%) for the diagnosis of high-grade PAS.</p><p><strong>Conclusions: </strong>The combined ultrasound markers of LUS remodeling are common in both high-grade PAS and uterine-scar dehiscence, while the combined features of abnormal vascularity (uteroplacental vascular remodeling and serosal hypervascularity) are specific to high-grade PAS. Understanding these pathophysiological differences would enhance the diagnostic accuracy of ultrasound in distinguishing between these two conditions. © 2024 The Author(s). Ultrasound in Obstetrics & Gynecology published by John Wiley & Sons Ltd on behalf of International Society of Ultrasound in Obstetrics and Gynecology.</p>","PeriodicalId":23454,"journal":{"name":"Ultrasound in Obstetrics & Gynecology","volume":" ","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":6.1000,"publicationDate":"2024-12-15","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Ultrasound in Obstetrics & Gynecology","FirstCategoryId":"3","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1002/uog.29144","RegionNum":1,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q1","JCRName":"ACOUSTICS","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

Objective: Accurate differentiation between placenta accreta spectrum (PAS) and uterine-scar dehiscence with underlying non-adherent placenta is often challenging, even for PAS experts, both prenatally and intraoperatively. We investigated the use of standardized two-dimensional grayscale ultrasound and Doppler imaging markers in differentiating between these closely related, yet distinct, conditions.

Methods: This was a retrospective cohort study conducted in two centers with specialized PAS services. All consecutive women with at least one previous Cesarean delivery and a current pregnancy with a low-lying placenta or placenta previa, for whom detailed prenatal ultrasound, management and outcome information was available for review by the research team, were included. PAS was diagnosed clinically by the abnormal adherence of the placenta to the uterus. The PAS cases were classified using the International Federation of Gynecology and Obstetrics clinical classification. Grade 1 was considered low-grade PAS while Grades 2 and 3 were classified as high-grade PAS. The ultrasound markers were categorized according to their underlying pathophysiology, including lower uterine segment (LUS) remodeling, uteroplacental vascular remodeling and serosal hypervascularity. The combined ultrasound features were analyzed among the PAS and non-PAS subgroups using the chi-square test or Fisher's exact test, and univariable and multivariable logistic regression analysis. Additionally, receiver-operating-characteristics (ROC) curves were used to evaluate the diagnostic accuracy of the combined ultrasound features in differentiating between high-grade PAS and uterine-scar dehiscence.

Results: Out of the 150 cases retrieved, six cases were excluded for not meeting the eligibility criteria. The included 144 cases comprised 89 cases of PAS, 23 cases of uterine-scar dehiscence and 32 cases of uncomplicated low-lying placenta or placenta previa. Among the PAS cases, there were 16 cases of low-grade PAS and 73 of high-grade PAS. Combined signs of LUS remodeling were present in most cases of uterine-scar dehiscence (20/23 (87.0%)) and high-grade PAS (67/73 (91.8%)) (P = 0.444), while these signs were absent in cases of low-grade PAS (0/16) and uncomplicated low-lying placenta or placenta previa (0/32). A subgroup analysis of cases with all LUS remodeling features present revealed that the combined signs of serosal hypervascularity (adjusted odds ratio (aOR), 41.2 (95% CI, 7.5-225.3)) and uteroplacental vascular remodeling (aOR, 116.0 (95% CI, 15.3-878.3)) were significantly associated with high-grade PAS. Diagnostic accuracy testing within this subgroup revealed an area under the ROC curve (AUC) of 0.90 (95% CI, 0.81-0.99), sensitivity of 89.6% (95% CI, 79.7-95.7%) and specificity of 90.0% (95% CI, 68.3-98.8%) for the diagnosis of high-grade PAS when all signs of uteroplacental vascular remodeling were present. If both signs of serosal hypervascularity were present, the AUC was 0.84 (95% CI, 0.74-0.95) with a sensitivity of 83.6% (95% CI, 72.5-91.5%) and specificity of 85.0% (95% CI, 62.1-96.8%) for the diagnosis of high-grade PAS.

Conclusions: The combined ultrasound markers of LUS remodeling are common in both high-grade PAS and uterine-scar dehiscence, while the combined features of abnormal vascularity (uteroplacental vascular remodeling and serosal hypervascularity) are specific to high-grade PAS. Understanding these pathophysiological differences would enhance the diagnostic accuracy of ultrasound in distinguishing between these two conditions. © 2024 The Author(s). Ultrasound in Obstetrics & Gynecology published by John Wiley & Sons Ltd on behalf of International Society of Ultrasound in Obstetrics and Gynecology.

查看原文
分享 分享
微信好友 朋友圈 QQ好友 复制链接
本刊更多论文
探索病理生理学见解,提高超声标记的诊断效用,以区分胎盘早剥和子宫疤痕开裂。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 去求助
来源期刊
CiteScore
12.30
自引率
14.10%
发文量
891
审稿时长
1 months
期刊介绍: Ultrasound in Obstetrics & Gynecology (UOG) is the official journal of the International Society of Ultrasound in Obstetrics and Gynecology (ISUOG) and is considered the foremost international peer-reviewed journal in the field. It publishes cutting-edge research that is highly relevant to clinical practice, which includes guidelines, expert commentaries, consensus statements, original articles, and systematic reviews. UOG is widely recognized and included in prominent abstract and indexing databases such as Index Medicus and Current Contents.
期刊最新文献
Reply. Why create a new protocol or a new consensus in the ultrasound diagnosis of endometriosis? Exploring pathophysiological insights to improve diagnostic utility of ultrasound markers for distinguishing placenta accreta spectrum from uterine-scar dehiscence. Re: Role of artificial-intelligence-assisted automated cardiac biometrics in prenatal screening for coarctation of aorta. Reply.
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
现在去查看 取消
×
提示
确定
0
微信
客服QQ
Book学术公众号 扫码关注我们
反馈
×
意见反馈
请填写您的意见或建议
请填写您的手机或邮箱
已复制链接
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
×
扫码分享
扫码分享
Book学术官方微信
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术
文献互助 智能选刊 最新文献 互助须知 联系我们:info@booksci.cn
Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。
Copyright © 2023 Book学术 All rights reserved.
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号 京ICP备2023020795号-1