PDF herunterladen
CC BY 4.0 · Rev Bras Ginecol Obstet 2019; 41(01): 017-023
DOI: 10.1055/s-0038-1675803
Original Article
Thieme Revinter Publicações Ltda Rio de Janeiro, Brazil

Assessment of Sensitivity and Specificity of Ultrasound and Magnetic Resonance Imaging in the Diagnosis of Placenta Accreta

Avaliação da sensibilidade e especificidade da ultrassonografia e ressonância magnética no diagnóstico da placenta acreta
Elisa Santos Lopes
1   Department of Maternal and Child, Maternidade Escola Assis Chateaubriand, Universidade Federal do Ceará, Fortaleza, CE, Brazil
,
Francisco Edson de Lucena Feitosa
1   Department of Maternal and Child, Maternidade Escola Assis Chateaubriand, Universidade Federal do Ceará, Fortaleza, CE, Brazil
,
Antonio Viana Brazil
1   Department of Maternal and Child, Maternidade Escola Assis Chateaubriand, Universidade Federal do Ceará, Fortaleza, CE, Brazil
,
José Daniel Vieira de Castro
1   Department of Maternal and Child, Maternidade Escola Assis Chateaubriand, Universidade Federal do Ceará, Fortaleza, CE, Brazil
,
Jesus Irajacy Fernandes da Costa
1   Department of Maternal and Child, Maternidade Escola Assis Chateaubriand, Universidade Federal do Ceará, Fortaleza, CE, Brazil
,
Edward Araujo Júnior 
2   Paulista School of Medicine, Department of Obstetrics, Universidade Federal de São Paulo, SP, Brazil
,
Alberto Borges Peixoto
3   Department of Obstetrics and Gynecology, Universidade Federal do Triângulo Mineiro, Uberaba, MG, Brazil
,
Francisco Herlânio Costa Carvalho
1   Department of Maternal and Child, Maternidade Escola Assis Chateaubriand, Universidade Federal do Ceará, Fortaleza, CE, Brazil
› Institutsangaben
Weitere Informationen

Publikationsverlauf

29. Mai 2018

01. Oktober 2018

Publikationsdatum:
14. November 2018 (online)

   Lizenzen und Reprints

Abstract

Objective To assess and compare the sensitivity and specificity of ultrasonography and magnetic resonance imaging in the diagnosis of placenta accreta in patients with placenta previa.

Methods This retrospective cohort study included 37 women, and was conducted between January 2013 and October 2015; 16 out of the 37 women suffered from placenta accreta. Histopathology was considered the gold standard for the diagnosis of placenta accreta; in its absence, a description of the intraoperative findings was used. The associations among the variables were investigated using the Pearson chi-squared test and the Mann-Whitney U-test.

Results The mean age of the patients was 31.8 ± 7.3 years, the mean number of pregnancies was 2.8 ± 1.1, the mean number of births was 1.4 ± 0.7, and the mean number of previous cesarean sections was 1.2 ± 0.8. Patients with placenta accreta had a higher frequency of history of cesarean section than those without it (63.6% versus 36.4% respectively; p < 0.001). The mean gestational age at birth among women diagnosed with placenta previa accreta was 35.4 ± 1.1 weeks. The mean birth weight was 2,635.9 ± 374.1 g. The sensitivity of the ultrasound was 87.5%, with a positive predictive value (PPV) of 65.1%, and a negative predictive value (NPV) of 75.0%. The sensitivity of the magnetic resonance imaging was 92.9%, with a PPV of 76.5%, and a NPV of 75.0%. The kappa coefficient of agreement between the 2 tests was 0.69 (95% confidence interval [95%CI]: (0.26–1.00).

Conclusion The ultrasound and the magnetic resonance imaging showed similar sensitivity and specificity for the diagnosis of placenta accreta.

Resumo

Objetivo Avaliar e comparar a sensibilidade e especificidade da ultrassonografia e da ressonância magnética no diagnóstico do acretismo placentário em pacientes com placenta prévia.

Métodos Estudo de coorte retrospectivo com 37 mulheres, sendo 16 com acretismo placentário, realizado de janeiro de 2013 a outubro de 2015. Considerou-se padrão-ouro para o diagnóstico de acretismo placentário o exame anatomopatológico, sendo que, na sua ausência, a descrição do achado intraoperatório. As associações entre variáveis foram investigadas utilizando o teste qui-quadrado de Pearson e o teste U de Mann-Whitney.

Resultados A idade média foi de 31,8 ± 7,3 anos, o número médio de gestações foi de 2,8 ± 1,1, o número médio da quantidade de partos foi de 1,4 ± 0,7, e o número médio de cesáreas prévias foi de 1,2 ± 0,8. O grupo do acretismo placentário apresentou antecedente de cesariana mais frequentemente do que o grupo sem acretismo (63,6% versus 36,4%, respectivamente; p < 0,001). A idade gestacional no parto em mulheres com diagnóstico de placenta prévia com acretismo foi de 35,4 ± 1,1 semanas. O peso ao nascer médio foi de 2.635,9 ± 374,1 g. A sensibilidade do ultrassom foi de 87,5%, com valor preditivo positivo (VPP) de 65,1%, e valor preditivo negativo (VPN) de 75,0%. Para a ressonância magnética, a sensibilidade foi de 92,9%, com VPP de 76,5% e VPN de 75,0%. O índice kappa para concordância entre os dois testes foi de 0,69 (intervalo de confiança de 95% [IC95%]: 0,26–1,00).

Conclusão O ultrassom e a ressonância magnética apresentaram sensibilidade e especificidade semelhantes no diagnóstico do acretismo placentário.

Keywords

placenta previa - placenta accreta - ultrasound - magnetic resonance imaging

Palavras-chave

placenta prévia - acretismo placentário - ultrassom - ressonância magnética

Contributors

Lopes ES, Feitosa FEL, Brazil AV, Castro JDV, Costa JIF, Araujo Júnior E, Peixoto AB and Carvalho FHC designed the study, analyzed and interpreted the data, wrote the article, and approved the final version of the manuscript for publication.


 

  • References

  • 1 Farquhar CM, Li Z, Lensen S. , et al. Incidence, risk factors and perinatal outcomes for placenta accreta in Australia and New Zealand: a case-control study. BMJ Open 2017; 7 (10) e017713 Doi: 10.1136/bmjopen-2017-017713
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 2 Wu S, Kocherginsky M, Hibbard JU. Abnormal placentation: twenty-year analysis. Am J Obstet Gynecol 2005; 192 (05) 1458-1461 Doi: 10.1016/j.ajog.2004.12.074
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 3 Finberg HJ, Williams JW. Placenta accreta: prospective sonographic diagnosis in patients with placenta previa and prior cesarean section. J Ultrasound Med 1992; 11 (07) 333-343 Doi: 10.7863/jum.1992.11.7.333
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 4 Chou MM, Ho ES, Lee YH. Prenatal diagnosis of placenta previa accreta by transabdominal color Doppler ultrasound. Ultrasound Obstet Gynecol 2000; 15 (01) 28-35
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 5 Wang Y, Gao Y, Zhao Y, Chong Y, Chen Y. Ultrasonographic diagnosis of severe placental invasion. J Obstet Gynaecol Res 2018; 44 (03) 448-455 Doi: 10.1111/jog.13531
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 6 Budorick NE, Figueroa R, Vizcarra M, Shin J. Another look at ultrasound and magnetic resonance imaging for diagnosis of placenta accreta. J Matern Fetal Neonatal Med 2017; 30 (20) 2422-2427
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 7 Maher MA, Abdelaziz A, Bazeed MF. Diagnostic accuracy of ultrasound and MRI in the prenatal diagnosis of placenta accreta. Acta Obstet Gynecol Scand 2013; 92 (09) 1017-1022 Doi: 10.1111/aogs.12187
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 8 Satija B, Kumar S, Wadhwa L. , et al. Utility of ultrasound and magnetic resonance imaging in prenatal diagnosis of placenta accreta: A prospective study. Indian J Radiol Imaging 2015; 25 (04) 464-470 Doi: 10.4103/0971-3026.169456
    Artikel in Thieme ConnectPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 9 Rezk MA, Shawky M. Grey-scale and colour Doppler ultrasound versus magnetic resonance imaging for the prenatal diagnosis of placenta accreta. J Matern Fetal Neonatal Med 2016; 29 (02) 218-223 Doi: 10.3109/14767058.2014.993604
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 10 Daney de Marcillac F, Molière S, Pinton A. , et al. [Accuracy of placenta accreta prenatal diagnosis by ultrasound and MRI in a high-risk population]. J Gynecol Obstet Biol Reprod (Paris) 2016; 45 (02) 198-206 Doi: 10.1016/j.jgyn.2015.07.004
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 11 Committee on Obstetric Practice. Committee opinion no. 529: placenta accreta. Obstet Gynecol 2012; 120 (01) 207-211 Doi: 10.1097/AOG.0b013e318262e340
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 12 Calì G, Giambanco L, Puccio G, Forlani F. Morbidly adherent placenta: evaluation of ultrasound diagnostic criteria and differentiation of placenta accreta from percreta. Ultrasound Obstet Gynecol 2013; 41 (04) 406-412 Doi: 10.1002/uog.12385
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 13 Rac MW, Dashe JS, Wells CE, Moschos E, McIntire DD, Twickler DM. Ultrasound predictors of placental invasion: the Placenta Accreta Index. Am J Obstet Gynecol 2015; 212 (03) 343.e1-343.e7 Doi: 10.1016/j.ajog.2014.10.022
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 14 Sumano-Ziga E, Veloz-Martínez MG, Vázquez-Rodríguez JG, Becerra-Alcántara G, Jimenez Vieyra CR. [Scheduled hysterectomy vs. urgent hysterectomy in patients with placenta accreta in a high specialty medical unit]. Cir Cir 2015; 83 (04) 303-308 Doi: 10.1016/j.circir.2015.01.001
    PubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 15 Rao KP, Belogolovkin V, Yankowitz J, Spinnato II JA. Abnormal placentation: evidence-based diagnosis and management of placenta previa, placenta accreta, and vasa previa. Obstet Gynecol Surv 2012; 67 (08) 503-519 Doi: 10.1097/OGX.0b013e3182685870
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 16 Lima ER, Feitosa HN, Feitosa FEL, Carvalho FHC. Maternal and perinatal outcomes in pregnancies with placenta previa with and without accreta at a tertiary center. Rev Med UFC 2015; 55: 18-24 Doi: 10.20513/2447-6595.2015v55n1p18-24
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 17 Comstock CH, Bronsteen RA. The antenatal diagnosis of placenta accreta. BJOG 2014; 121 (02) 171-181, discussion 181–182 Doi: 10.1111/1471-0528.12557
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 18 Allen BC, Leyendecker JR. Placental evaluation with magnetic resonance. Radiol Clin North Am 2013; 51 (06) 955-966 Doi: 10.1016/j.rcl.2013.07.009
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 19 Baughman WC, Corteville JE, Shah RR. Placenta accreta: spectrum of US and MR imaging findings. Radiographics 2008; 28 (07) 1905-1916 Doi: 10.1148/rg.287085060
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 20 Bowman ZS, Eller AG, Kennedy AM. , et al. Accuracy of ultrasound for the prediction of placenta accreta. Am J Obstet Gynecol 2014; 211 (02) 177.e1-177.e7 Doi: 10.1016/j.ajog.2014.03.029
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 21 Meng X, Xie L, Song W. Comparing the diagnostic value of ultrasound and magnetic resonance imaging for placenta accreta: a systematic review and meta-analysis. Ultrasound Med Biol 2013; 39 (11) 1958-1965 Doi: 10.1016/j.ultrasmedbio.2013.05.017
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 22 Ueno Y, Kitajima K, Kawakami F. , et al. Novel MRI finding for diagnosis of invasive placenta praevia: evaluation of findings for 65 patients using clinical and histopathological correlations. Eur Radiol 2014; 24 (04) 881-888 Doi: 10.1007/s00330-013-3076-7
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 23 Masselli G, Gualdi G. MR imaging of the placenta: what a radiologist should know. Abdom Imaging 2013; 38 (03) 573-587 Doi: 10.1007/s00261-012-9929-8
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar