Subscribe to RSS

DOI: 10.1055/s-0045-1809683
2D Shear Wave Elastography: An Evolving Technique for Comparison of Placental Elasticity in Normal and Preeclamptic Pregnancy
Authors
Abstract
Objective
This article evaluates differences in placental elasticity between normal and preeclamptic pregnancies using shear wave elastography and assesses the potential of the placental elasticity values in predicting preeclampsia.
Materials and Methods
The study included 60 pregnant women, 30 diagnosed with preeclampsia and 30 with normal pregnancies, in their second and third trimesters. Shear wave elastography was performed to assess placental elasticity. Both mean (average) and maximum elasticity values were recorded and cutoff values were determined using receiver operating characteristic (ROC) curve analysis to evaluate their potential in predicting preeclampsia.
Results
Placental elasticity values were significantly higher in preeclamptic women (group A) compared with healthy pregnant women (group B). The mean elasticity in group A was 15.74 ± 3.51 kPa, with a maximum elasticity of 27.4 ± 4.66 kPa; whereas in group B, the corresponding values were 4.42 ± 1.93 and 7.13 ± 3.05 kPa, respectively (p < 0.0001). In preeclampsia cases, the shear wave modulus was higher in the central region of the placenta than at the edges. ROC curve analysis evaluated a mean elasticity cutoff value of 8.1 kPa, with a sensitivity of 100%, specificity of 96.67%, positive predictive value of 96.8%, negative predictive value of 100%, and a diagnostic accuracy of 98.33%.
Conclusion
The study revealed significant differences in placental elasticity between preeclamptic and healthy pregnancies, highlighting the potential of shear wave elastography as a valuable tool for early prediction of preeclampsia. Early prediction using this method could significantly reduce maternal and perinatal mortality and morbidity, especially in developing countries, by identifying cases before the onset of clinical symptoms.
Keywords
2D-shear wave elastography (2D-SWE) - kilopascals (kPa) - point shear wave elastography (p-SWE) - preeclampsia (PE) - acoustic radiation force impulse (ARFI)Publication History
Article published online:
19 June 2025
© 2025. Indian Radiological Association. This is an open access article published by Thieme under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution-NonDerivative-NonCommercial License, permitting copying and reproduction so long as the original work is given appropriate credit. Contents may not be used for commercial purposes, or adapted, remixed, transformed or built upon. (https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc-nd/4.0/)
Thieme Medical and Scientific Publishers Pvt. Ltd.
A-12, 2nd Floor, Sector 2, Noida-201301 UP, India
-
References
- 1 Xiong X, Buekens P, Pridjian G, Fraser WD. Pregnancy-induced hypertension and perinatal mortality. J Reprod Med 2007; 52 (05) 402-406 [Internet]
- 2 Dhinwa M, Gawande K, Jha N, Anjali M, Bhadoria AS, Sinha S. Prevalence of hypertensive disorders of pregnancy in India a systematic review and meta-analysis. J Med Evid 2021; 2 (02) 105-112
- 3 Harmon QE, Huang L, Umbach DM. et al. Risk of fetal death with preeclampsia. Obstet Gynecol 2015; 125 (03) 628-635
- 4 Conde-Agudelo A, Romero R, Roberts JM. Tests to predict preeclampsia. In: Chesley's Hypertensive Disorders in Pregnancy. 2014. Elsevier; 189-211
- 5 Cnossen JS, Morris RK, ter Riet G. et al. Use of uterine artery Doppler ultrasonography to predict pre-eclampsia and intrauterine growth restriction: a systematic review and bivariable meta-analysis. CMAJ 2008; 178 (06) 701-711
- 6 Espinoza J. Recent biomarkers for the identification of patients at risk for preeclampsia: the role of uteroplacental ischemia. Expert Opin Med Diagn 2012; 6 (02) 121-130
- 7 Soma H, Yoshida K, Mukaida T, Tabuchi Y. Morphologic changes in the hypertensive placenta. Contrib Gynecol Obstet 1982; 9: 58-75
- 8 Wright D, Syngelaki A, Akolekar R. Competing risks model in screening for preeclampsia by maternal characterics and medical history. Am J Obstet Gynecol 2015; 213: e62-e63
- 9 O'Gorman N, Wright D, Syngelaki A. et al. Competing risks model in screening for preeclampsia by maternal factors and biomarkers at 11-13 weeks gestation. Am J Obstet Gynecol 2016; 214 (01) 103.e1-103.e12
- 10 Cimsit C, Yoldemir T, Akpinar IN. Shear wave elastography in placental dysfunction: comparison of elasticity values in normal and preeclamptic pregnancies in the second trimester. J Ultrasound Med 2015; 34 (01) 151-159
- 11 DeLong ER, DeLong DM, Clarke-Pearson DL. Comparing the areas under two or more correlated receiver operating characteristic curves: a nonparametric approach. Biometrics 1988; 44 (03) 837-45
- 12 Meena R, Malik A, Jain S, Batra A. Placental elastography in second trimester preeclampsia prediction: a prospective study. Ultrasound 2022; 30 (03) 228-235
- 13 Spiliopoulos M, Kuo C-Y, Eranki A. et al. Characterizing placental stiffness using ultrasound shear-wave elastography in healthy and preeclamptic pregnancies. Arch Gynecol Obstet 2020; 302 (05) 1103-1112 [Internet]
- 14 Fujita Y, Nakanishi TO, Sugitani M, Kato K. Placental elasticity as a new non-invasive predictive marker of pre-eclampsia. Ultrasound Med Biol 2019; 45 (01) 93-97
- 15 Akbas M, Koyuncu FM, Artunç-Ulkumen B. Placental elasticity assessment by point shear wave elastography in pregnancies with intrauterine growth restriction. J Perinat Med 2019; 47 (08) 841-846
- 16 Kılıç F, Kayadibi Y, Yüksel MA. et al. Shear wave elastography of placenta: in vivo quantitation of placental elasticity in preeclampsia. Diagn Interv Radiol 2015; 21 (03) 202-207

