{"title":"Incidence and Diagnostic Performance of Postnatal Ultrasound for Presacral Masses in Pediatric Patients with Anorectal Malformation.","authors":"Takahiro Hosokawa, Yumiko Sato, Yutaka Tanami, Kyoichi Deie, Hiroshi Kawashima, Eiji Oguma","doi":"10.1002/jum.16724","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Objectives: </strong>To determine the incidence of presacral masses in patients with anorectal malformations (ARMs) and evaluate the diagnostic performance of ultrasound to detect presacral masses during the neonatal period.</p><p><strong>Methods: </strong>Pediatric patients with ARM underwent ultrasonography during the neonatal period, and their magnetic resonance imaging (MRI) results were reviewed. The presence or absence of a presacral mass was assessed employing ultrasonography and compared with MRI results using the Clopper-Pearson method. The type of ARM (low/not-low) and the presence or absence of sacral anomalies were compared between patients with and without a presacral mass using Fisher's exact test.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>The incidence of presacral masses in our study cohort was 4.6% (5/109). Ultrasound diagnostic performance for detecting presacral masses had an accuracy of 98.2% (95% confidence interval (CI): 93.5-99.8), sensitivity of 60% (95% CI: 14.7-94.7), specificity of 100% (95% CI: 96.5-100), positive predictive value of 100% (95% CI: 29.3-100), and negative predictive value of 98.1% (95% CI: 93.4-99.8). ARM type and presence or absence of sacral anomalies were significantly different between the presacral mass and without presacral mass groups (low/not-low = 5/0 vs 47/57, P = .022; and presence/absence of sacral anomalies = 3/2 vs 18/86, respectively, P = .048).</p><p><strong>Conclusions: </strong>The incidence of presacral masses in pediatric patients with ARM was low (5%). Although the positive predictive value was reliable, ultrasonography performed during the neonatal period was not sensitive. Therefore, sonographers should pay attention when evaluating patients with low-type ARMs accompanying sacral anomalies to avoid overlooking them.</p>","PeriodicalId":17563,"journal":{"name":"Journal of Ultrasound in Medicine","volume":" ","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":2.1000,"publicationDate":"2025-05-16","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Journal of Ultrasound in Medicine","FirstCategoryId":"3","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1002/jum.16724","RegionNum":4,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q2","JCRName":"ACOUSTICS","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0
Abstract
Objectives: To determine the incidence of presacral masses in patients with anorectal malformations (ARMs) and evaluate the diagnostic performance of ultrasound to detect presacral masses during the neonatal period.
Methods: Pediatric patients with ARM underwent ultrasonography during the neonatal period, and their magnetic resonance imaging (MRI) results were reviewed. The presence or absence of a presacral mass was assessed employing ultrasonography and compared with MRI results using the Clopper-Pearson method. The type of ARM (low/not-low) and the presence or absence of sacral anomalies were compared between patients with and without a presacral mass using Fisher's exact test.
Results: The incidence of presacral masses in our study cohort was 4.6% (5/109). Ultrasound diagnostic performance for detecting presacral masses had an accuracy of 98.2% (95% confidence interval (CI): 93.5-99.8), sensitivity of 60% (95% CI: 14.7-94.7), specificity of 100% (95% CI: 96.5-100), positive predictive value of 100% (95% CI: 29.3-100), and negative predictive value of 98.1% (95% CI: 93.4-99.8). ARM type and presence or absence of sacral anomalies were significantly different between the presacral mass and without presacral mass groups (low/not-low = 5/0 vs 47/57, P = .022; and presence/absence of sacral anomalies = 3/2 vs 18/86, respectively, P = .048).
Conclusions: The incidence of presacral masses in pediatric patients with ARM was low (5%). Although the positive predictive value was reliable, ultrasonography performed during the neonatal period was not sensitive. Therefore, sonographers should pay attention when evaluating patients with low-type ARMs accompanying sacral anomalies to avoid overlooking them.
期刊介绍:
The Journal of Ultrasound in Medicine (JUM) is dedicated to the rapid, accurate publication of original articles dealing with all aspects of medical ultrasound, particularly its direct application to patient care but also relevant basic science, advances in instrumentation, and biological effects. The journal is an official publication of the American Institute of Ultrasound in Medicine and publishes articles in a variety of categories, including Original Research papers, Review Articles, Pictorial Essays, Technical Innovations, Case Series, Letters to the Editor, and more, from an international bevy of countries in a continual effort to showcase and promote advances in the ultrasound community.
Represented through these efforts are a wide variety of disciplines of ultrasound, including, but not limited to:
-Basic Science-
Breast Ultrasound-
Contrast-Enhanced Ultrasound-
Dermatology-
Echocardiography-
Elastography-
Emergency Medicine-
Fetal Echocardiography-
Gastrointestinal Ultrasound-
General and Abdominal Ultrasound-
Genitourinary Ultrasound-
Gynecologic Ultrasound-
Head and Neck Ultrasound-
High Frequency Clinical and Preclinical Imaging-
Interventional-Intraoperative Ultrasound-
Musculoskeletal Ultrasound-
Neurosonology-
Obstetric Ultrasound-
Ophthalmologic Ultrasound-
Pediatric Ultrasound-
Point-of-Care Ultrasound-
Public Policy-
Superficial Structures-
Therapeutic Ultrasound-
Ultrasound Education-
Ultrasound in Global Health-
Urologic Ultrasound-
Vascular Ultrasound