Comparison of the value of transvaginal ultrasonography and MRI in the diagnosis of cesarean scar pregnancy: a meta-analysis.

IF 1.7 4区 医学 Q3 OBSTETRICS & GYNECOLOGY
Xiao Han, Boyang Zhang
{"title":"Comparison of the value of transvaginal ultrasonography and MRI in the diagnosis of cesarean scar pregnancy: a meta-analysis.","authors":"Xiao Han, Boyang Zhang","doi":"10.1080/14767058.2024.2445661","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Objective: </strong>To compare the diagnostic value of transvaginal ultrasound (TVS) and magnetic resonance imaging (MRI) in cesarean scar pregnancy (CSP) by a method of meta-analysis.</p><p><strong>Methods: </strong>Studies on TVS and MRI for CSP were collected from PubMed, Cochrane Library, Embase, Web of Science, China National Knowledge Infrastructure (CNKI), Wanfang data, and Chinese Scientific Journal Database (VIP database) until April 1, 2024. Stata 15.0 software was used for data analysis. Mann-Whitney U-test was applied to compare the diagnostic efficiency of the TVS and MRI groups.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>Nine articles with 713 subjects were involved in this review. The pooled sensitivity (0.96, 95%CI: 0.94-0.97), specificity (0.90, 95%CI: 0.84-0.94), and DOR (197.28, 95%CI: 99.71-390.31) in the MRI group were higher than those (Sensitivity = 0.83, 95%CI: 0.77-0.87; Specificity= 0.74, 95%CI: 0.63-0.83; DOR = 13.66, 95%CI: 7.84-23.79) in the TVS group. The positive likelihood ratio and negative likelihood ratio of the MRI group were 9.56 (95%CI: 8.82-15.72) and 0.05 (95%CI: 0.03-0.07), while those of the TVS group were 3.21 (95%CI:2.18-4.74) and 0.24 (95%CI: 0.18-0.31), respectively. In the MRI and TVS groups, the area under the curve (AUC) of the summary receiver operating characteristic was 0.9497 and 0.86, respectively. The results of Mann-Whitney U-tests of the two groups showed significant differences in the pooled sensitivity (Z= -3.311, <i>p</i> < 0.001), specificity (Z= -2.123, <i>p</i> = 0.034), and DOR (Z= -3.272, <i>p</i> = 0.001).</p><p><strong>Conclusion: </strong>Both MRI and TVS can effectively diagnose CSP. However, compared with TVS, MRI has better diagnostic accuracy for CSP, with higher sensitivity and specificity. Considering the good diagnostic accuracy of ultrasound, patients with ultrasound suspicion of CSP should be sent to a reference center where MRI can express its full diagnostic potential regarding depth, topography of invasion and myometral residue, which is useful for subsequent management.</p>","PeriodicalId":50146,"journal":{"name":"Journal of Maternal-Fetal & Neonatal Medicine","volume":"38 1","pages":"2445661"},"PeriodicalIF":1.7000,"publicationDate":"2025-12-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Journal of Maternal-Fetal & Neonatal Medicine","FirstCategoryId":"3","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1080/14767058.2024.2445661","RegionNum":4,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"2025/1/6 0:00:00","PubModel":"Epub","JCR":"Q3","JCRName":"OBSTETRICS & GYNECOLOGY","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

Objective: To compare the diagnostic value of transvaginal ultrasound (TVS) and magnetic resonance imaging (MRI) in cesarean scar pregnancy (CSP) by a method of meta-analysis.

Methods: Studies on TVS and MRI for CSP were collected from PubMed, Cochrane Library, Embase, Web of Science, China National Knowledge Infrastructure (CNKI), Wanfang data, and Chinese Scientific Journal Database (VIP database) until April 1, 2024. Stata 15.0 software was used for data analysis. Mann-Whitney U-test was applied to compare the diagnostic efficiency of the TVS and MRI groups.

Results: Nine articles with 713 subjects were involved in this review. The pooled sensitivity (0.96, 95%CI: 0.94-0.97), specificity (0.90, 95%CI: 0.84-0.94), and DOR (197.28, 95%CI: 99.71-390.31) in the MRI group were higher than those (Sensitivity = 0.83, 95%CI: 0.77-0.87; Specificity= 0.74, 95%CI: 0.63-0.83; DOR = 13.66, 95%CI: 7.84-23.79) in the TVS group. The positive likelihood ratio and negative likelihood ratio of the MRI group were 9.56 (95%CI: 8.82-15.72) and 0.05 (95%CI: 0.03-0.07), while those of the TVS group were 3.21 (95%CI:2.18-4.74) and 0.24 (95%CI: 0.18-0.31), respectively. In the MRI and TVS groups, the area under the curve (AUC) of the summary receiver operating characteristic was 0.9497 and 0.86, respectively. The results of Mann-Whitney U-tests of the two groups showed significant differences in the pooled sensitivity (Z= -3.311, p < 0.001), specificity (Z= -2.123, p = 0.034), and DOR (Z= -3.272, p = 0.001).

Conclusion: Both MRI and TVS can effectively diagnose CSP. However, compared with TVS, MRI has better diagnostic accuracy for CSP, with higher sensitivity and specificity. Considering the good diagnostic accuracy of ultrasound, patients with ultrasound suspicion of CSP should be sent to a reference center where MRI can express its full diagnostic potential regarding depth, topography of invasion and myometral residue, which is useful for subsequent management.

经阴道超声与MRI对剖宫产瘢痕妊娠诊断价值的比较:meta分析。
目的:采用meta分析方法,比较经阴道超声(TVS)与磁共振成像(MRI)对剖宫产瘢痕妊娠(CSP)的诊断价值。方法:截至2024年4月1日,收集PubMed、Cochrane Library、Embase、Web of Science、中国知网(CNKI)、万方数据、中国科学期刊数据库(VIP数据库)中关于CSP的TVS和MRI研究。采用Stata 15.0软件进行数据分析。采用Mann-Whitney u检验比较TVS组和MRI组的诊断效率。结果:本综述纳入9篇文章,713名受试者。MRI组的综合敏感性(0.96,95%CI: 0.94-0.97)、特异性(0.90,95%CI: 0.84-0.94)和DOR (197.28, 95%CI: 99.71-390.31)均高于对照组(敏感性= 0.83,95%CI: 0.77-0.87;特异性= 0.74,95%CI: 0.63-0.83;DOR = 13.66, 95%CI: 7.84 ~ 23.79)。MRI组阳性似然比为9.56 (95%CI: 8.82 ~ 15.72),阴性似然比为0.05 (95%CI: 0.03 ~ 0.07), TVS组阳性似然比为3.21 (95%CI:2.18 ~ 4.74),阴性似然比为0.24 (95%CI: 0.18 ~ 0.31)。MRI组和TVS组总受者工作特征曲线下面积(AUC)分别为0.9497和0.86。两组的Mann-Whitney u检验结果显示,合并敏感性(Z= -3.311, p p = 0.034)和DOR (Z= -3.272, p = 0.001)存在显著差异。结论:MRI和TVS均能有效诊断CSP。但与TVS相比,MRI对CSP的诊断准确性更高,具有更高的敏感性和特异性。考虑到超声诊断准确性较好,超声怀疑为CSP的患者应转至参考中心,MRI可充分发挥其对CSP的深度、侵犯形貌和肌层残留的诊断潜力,对后续治疗有帮助。
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 求助全文
来源期刊
CiteScore
4.40
自引率
0.00%
发文量
217
审稿时长
2-3 weeks
期刊介绍: The official journal of The European Association of Perinatal Medicine, The Federation of Asia and Oceania Perinatal Societies and The International Society of Perinatal Obstetricians. The journal publishes a wide range of peer-reviewed research on the obstetric, medical, genetic, mental health and surgical complications of pregnancy and their effects on the mother, fetus and neonate. Research on audit, evaluation and clinical care in maternal-fetal and perinatal medicine is also featured.
×
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
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
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 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术官方微信