妊娠早期超声特征诊断瘢痕妊娠的准确性

IF 0.4 Q4 RADIOLOGY, NUCLEAR MEDICINE & MEDICAL IMAGING
Sonography Pub Date : 2023-09-05 DOI:10.1002/sono.12375
Lay Ee Chew, Chern‐Pin Eric Chua, Paul Lombardo, Melinda Goodyear, S. Teo
{"title":"妊娠早期超声特征诊断瘢痕妊娠的准确性","authors":"Lay Ee Chew, Chern‐Pin Eric Chua, Paul Lombardo, Melinda Goodyear, S. Teo","doi":"10.1002/sono.12375","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"Caesarean scar pregnancy (CSP), if not managed timely, can result in pre‐term labour, postpartum haemorrhage, hysterectomy or maternal and fetal death. This study aims to compare the diagnostic performances of different sonographic features recommended in various good practice recommendations and literature; then propose an algorithm that could aid in easier identification of CSP using transvaginal ultrasound.A retrospective review of ultrasound images of intrauterine pregnancy (IUP) and CSP between 4.9 and 11.9 weeks gestation was conducted. The diagnostic performance of the Royal College of Obstetricians & Gynaecologists (RCOG) guideline, Timor‐Tritsch et al. (TT) method and combined method were evaluated. An algorithm was then created to calculate a numerical value for diagnosis. The methods were tested for intra‐ and inter‐observer agreement.A total of 66 ultrasound cases (30 IUP and 36 CSP) were included in this study. The sensitivity of the RCOG guideline, TT method and combined method were 58.3%, 94.4% and 100% while the specificity were 96.7%, 90% and 90%, respectively. The TT method and combined method performed significantly better than the RCOG guideline (p = .0016 and .0002, respectively). Using the proposed algorithm, a value larger or equal to 52.2 gave 97.2% sensitivity and 93.3% specificity that CSP is present. Intra‐ and inter‐observer agreement for all methods were moderate to almost perfect.Screening during early first trimester is important to improve the diagnostic accuracy of CSP. The TT method is a good supplement to the RCOG guideline. The proposed algorithm is a useful tool to improve diagnostic accuracy and confidence.","PeriodicalId":29898,"journal":{"name":"Sonography","volume":"98 1","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":0.4000,"publicationDate":"2023-09-05","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Accuracy of first trimester sonographic features in diagnosing caesarean scar pregnancy\",\"authors\":\"Lay Ee Chew, Chern‐Pin Eric Chua, Paul Lombardo, Melinda Goodyear, S. Teo\",\"doi\":\"10.1002/sono.12375\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"Caesarean scar pregnancy (CSP), if not managed timely, can result in pre‐term labour, postpartum haemorrhage, hysterectomy or maternal and fetal death. This study aims to compare the diagnostic performances of different sonographic features recommended in various good practice recommendations and literature; then propose an algorithm that could aid in easier identification of CSP using transvaginal ultrasound.A retrospective review of ultrasound images of intrauterine pregnancy (IUP) and CSP between 4.9 and 11.9 weeks gestation was conducted. The diagnostic performance of the Royal College of Obstetricians & Gynaecologists (RCOG) guideline, Timor‐Tritsch et al. (TT) method and combined method were evaluated. An algorithm was then created to calculate a numerical value for diagnosis. The methods were tested for intra‐ and inter‐observer agreement.A total of 66 ultrasound cases (30 IUP and 36 CSP) were included in this study. The sensitivity of the RCOG guideline, TT method and combined method were 58.3%, 94.4% and 100% while the specificity were 96.7%, 90% and 90%, respectively. The TT method and combined method performed significantly better than the RCOG guideline (p = .0016 and .0002, respectively). Using the proposed algorithm, a value larger or equal to 52.2 gave 97.2% sensitivity and 93.3% specificity that CSP is present. Intra‐ and inter‐observer agreement for all methods were moderate to almost perfect.Screening during early first trimester is important to improve the diagnostic accuracy of CSP. The TT method is a good supplement to the RCOG guideline. The proposed algorithm is a useful tool to improve diagnostic accuracy and confidence.\",\"PeriodicalId\":29898,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Sonography\",\"volume\":\"98 1\",\"pages\":\"\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":0.4000,\"publicationDate\":\"2023-09-05\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Sonography\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"1085\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.1002/sono.12375\",\"RegionNum\":0,\"RegionCategory\":null,\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"Q4\",\"JCRName\":\"RADIOLOGY, NUCLEAR MEDICINE & MEDICAL IMAGING\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Sonography","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1002/sono.12375","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q4","JCRName":"RADIOLOGY, NUCLEAR MEDICINE & MEDICAL IMAGING","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

摘要

剖宫产瘢痕妊娠(CSP)如不及时处理,可导致早产、产后出血、子宫切除术或母婴死亡。本研究旨在比较各种良好实践建议和文献中推荐的不同超声特征的诊断性能;然后提出一种算法,可以帮助更容易地识别CSP使用经阴道超声。对妊娠4.9 ~ 11.9周的宫内妊娠(IUP)和CSP超声图像进行回顾性分析。评估英国皇家妇产科学院(RCOG)指南、Timor - Tritsch等(TT)方法和联合方法的诊断性能。然后创建了一个算法来计算用于诊断的数值。测试了这些方法在观察者内部和观察者之间的一致性。本研究共纳入66例超声检查,其中IUP 30例,CSP 36例。RCOG指南、TT法和联合法的敏感性分别为58.3%、94.4%和100%,特异性分别为96.7%、90%和90%。TT法和联合方法的疗效显著优于RCOG指南(p =。0016和0.0002)。使用该算法,大于或等于52.2的值表示CSP存在的敏感性为97.2%,特异性为93.3%。所有方法的观察者内部和观察者之间的一致性是中等到几乎完美的。妊娠早期筛查对提高CSP的诊断准确性非常重要。TT方法是RCOG指南的一个很好的补充。该算法是提高诊断准确率和置信度的有效工具。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
Accuracy of first trimester sonographic features in diagnosing caesarean scar pregnancy
Caesarean scar pregnancy (CSP), if not managed timely, can result in pre‐term labour, postpartum haemorrhage, hysterectomy or maternal and fetal death. This study aims to compare the diagnostic performances of different sonographic features recommended in various good practice recommendations and literature; then propose an algorithm that could aid in easier identification of CSP using transvaginal ultrasound.A retrospective review of ultrasound images of intrauterine pregnancy (IUP) and CSP between 4.9 and 11.9 weeks gestation was conducted. The diagnostic performance of the Royal College of Obstetricians & Gynaecologists (RCOG) guideline, Timor‐Tritsch et al. (TT) method and combined method were evaluated. An algorithm was then created to calculate a numerical value for diagnosis. The methods were tested for intra‐ and inter‐observer agreement.A total of 66 ultrasound cases (30 IUP and 36 CSP) were included in this study. The sensitivity of the RCOG guideline, TT method and combined method were 58.3%, 94.4% and 100% while the specificity were 96.7%, 90% and 90%, respectively. The TT method and combined method performed significantly better than the RCOG guideline (p = .0016 and .0002, respectively). Using the proposed algorithm, a value larger or equal to 52.2 gave 97.2% sensitivity and 93.3% specificity that CSP is present. Intra‐ and inter‐observer agreement for all methods were moderate to almost perfect.Screening during early first trimester is important to improve the diagnostic accuracy of CSP. The TT method is a good supplement to the RCOG guideline. The proposed algorithm is a useful tool to improve diagnostic accuracy and confidence.
求助全文
通过发布文献求助,成功后即可免费获取论文全文。 去求助
来源期刊
Sonography
Sonography RADIOLOGY, NUCLEAR MEDICINE & MEDICAL IMAGING-
CiteScore
0.80
自引率
0.00%
发文量
44
×
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