切换至 "中华医学电子期刊资源库"

中华妇幼临床医学杂志(电子版) ›› 2020, Vol. 16 ›› Issue (02) : 196 -201. doi: 10.3877/cma.j.issn.1673-5250.2020.02.011

所属专题: 文献

论著

产前MRI在胎盘植入性疾病诊断中的应用价值
刘建1, 李娅1,(), 李俊鹏1, 李易1   
  1. 1. 成都市第三人民医院放射科 610031
  • 收稿日期:2020-03-02 修回日期:2020-03-20 出版日期:2020-04-01
  • 通信作者: 李娅

Role of prenatal MRI in detecting placenta accreta spectrum disorders

Jian Liu1, Ya Li1,(), Junpeng Li1, Yi Li1   

  1. 1. Department of Radiology, Third People′s Hospital of Chengdu, Chengdu 610031, Sichuan Province, China
  • Received:2020-03-02 Revised:2020-03-20 Published:2020-04-01
  • Corresponding author: Ya Li
  • About author:
    Corresponding author: Li Ya, Email:
  • Supported by:
    Popularization and Application Project of Sichuan Provincial Health and Family Planning Commission(17PJ382)
引用本文:

刘建, 李娅, 李俊鹏, 李易. 产前MRI在胎盘植入性疾病诊断中的应用价值[J]. 中华妇幼临床医学杂志(电子版), 2020, 16(02): 196-201.

Jian Liu, Ya Li, Junpeng Li, Yi Li. Role of prenatal MRI in detecting placenta accreta spectrum disorders[J]. Chinese Journal of Obstetrics & Gynecology and Pediatrics(Electronic Edition), 2020, 16(02): 196-201.

目的

探讨产前MRI检查在胎盘植入性疾病(PAS)诊断中的应用价值。

方法

选择2018年1月至2019年12月,于成都市第三人民医院经临床及超声检查疑诊为PAS后,并进一步接受产前MRI检查的68例疑似PAS患者为研究对象。采用回顾性分析方法,采集其产前MRI影像学资料。以这68例受试者子宫切除术后切除组织的病理学检查结果为诊断PAS的"金标准",计算产前MRI辅助诊断PAS及对PAS进行分类(胎盘黏连、胎盘植入、穿透性胎盘植入)的敏感度、特异度。采用Kappa值,分析产前MRI辅助诊断与子宫切除术后切除组织的病理学检查结果诊断PAS及其分类结果的一致性。对经组织病理学检查确诊的PAS患者的MRI影像学资料进行分析。本研究遵循的程序符合2013年新修订的《世界医学协会赫尔辛基宣言》要求。

结果

①本组68例受试者中,56例经术后组织病理学检查确诊为PAS患者。采取产前MRI辅助诊断PAS的结果显示,54例呈阳性(PAS)患者中,1例经术后组织病理学检查结果证实不是PAS;14例呈阴性(非PAS)患者中,3例经术后组织病理学检查结果证实为PAS(均为胎盘黏连)患者。以术后组织病理学检查结果为诊断PAS的"金标准",产前MRI检查对于PAS及其3种分类(胎盘黏连、胎盘植入、穿透性胎盘植入)辅助诊断的敏感度分别为94.6%、44.4%、97.6%与40.0%,特异度分别为91.7%、98.3%、76.9%与100.0%。产前MRI检查与术后组织病理学检查结果,对于PAS的诊断一致性较高,Kappa值为0.810;对于胎盘黏连、胎盘植入、穿透性胎盘植入辅助诊断的Kappa值分别为0.527、0.774、0.553。②经术后组织病理学检查结果确诊为PAS的56例患者的MRI影像学资料中,出现胎盘组织侵入子宫肌层,胎盘组织侵入膀胱、输尿管等盆腔内组织,T2WI低信号带,胎盘信号不均匀,子宫下段膨隆,以及膀胱"帐篷征"表现者,分别为14例(25.0%)、8例(14.3%)、38例(67.9%)、33例(58.9%)、16例(28.6%)与7例(12.5%)。

结论

产前MRI检查,可对PAS进行影像学辅助诊断及分类,从而为临床针对PAS患者制定个体化治疗方案,改善其预后,提供一定参考。

Objective

To explore application value of prenatal MRI in detecting placenta accreta spectrum disorders (PAS).

Methods

A total of 68 suspected PAS patients by clinical and ultrasound examinations who received prenatal MRI detecting in the Third People′s Hospital of Chengdu from January 2018 to December 2019 were selected as research subjects. Their prenatal MRI data were retrospectively collected. Based on results of histopathological examination after operation as the " golden standard" for PAS diagnosis, the sensitivity and specificity of prenatal MRI auxiliary diagnosis of PAS and its three kinds of classifications (placenta adhesion, placenta implantation, placenta percreta) were calculated. The Kappa value was used to evaluate the consistency of prenatal MRI auxiliary diagnosis results and results of histopathological examination after operation in diagnosis of PAS and its three kinds of classifications for all subjects. The MRI data of PAS patients confirmed by results of histopathological examination after operation were analyzed. The procedures in this study were in line with the requirements of World Medical Association Declaration of Helsinki revised in 2013.

Results

①Among 68 subjects, 58 of them were confirmed as PAS by results of histopathological examination after operation. Auxiliary diagnosis results of prenatal MRI showed that 54 cases were positive (PAS patients), and one case of them was confirmed as without PAS by results of histopathological examination after operation, while 14 cases were negative (non-PAS patients), and 3 cases of them were confirmed as PAS by results of histopathological examination after operation (all were placental adhesion patients). With results of histopathological examination after operation as the golden standard of PAS diagnosis, the sensitivities of prenatal MRI for auxiliary diagnosis of PAS and its three kinds of classifications (placenta adhesion, placenta implantation, placenta percreta) were 94.6%, 44.4%, 97.6% and 40.0%, respectively, the specificities were 91.7%, 98.3%, 76.9% and 100.0%, respectively. Kappa consistency analysis showed a high consistency between results of prenatal MRI and histopathological examination after operation (Kappa value=0.810). The Kappa values for each PAS classification (placenta adhesion, placenta implantation, placenta percreta) were 0.527, 0.774, and 0.553, respectively. ②Among the prenatal MRI data of 56 cases of PAS patients confirmed by results of histopathological examination after operation, 14 cases (25.0%) showed signs of placental tissue invading the myometrium, 8 cases (14.3%) showed signs of placental tissue invading the pelvic tissues such as bladder and ureter, 38 cases (67.9%) showed low signal band on T2WI, 33 cases (58.9%) showed signs of inhomogeneous placental signal, 16 cases (28.6%) showed signs of swelling in the lower uterus, and 7 cases (12.5%) showed bladder tent signs.

Conclusions

Prenatal MRI examination can play the role of auxiliary diagnosis of PAS and its classifications, and provide reference for individualized treatment methods for PAS patients, and improve their prognosis.

表1 本组68例PAS疑似患者的产前MRI检查与术后组织病理学检查结果分析(例)
表2 产前MRI检查对PAS的辅助诊断价值
表3 根据术后组织病理学检查结果确诊的56例PAS患者的MRI特点分析[例数(%)]
图1 1例(年龄为32岁、孕龄为37孕周)胎盘黏连患者的产前MRI横断面检查结果(图1A:FIESTA图像;图1B:SSFSE图像)
图2 1例(年龄为28岁、孕龄为38孕周)胎盘植入患者的产前MRI检查结果(图2A:FIESTA冠状位图像;图2B:SSFSE矢状位图像)
图3 1例(年龄为34岁、孕龄为32孕周)穿透性胎盘植入患者的产前MRI检查结果(图3A、3B:SSFSE矢状位和横断面图像;图3C、3D:FIESTA矢状位和横断面图像)
图4 1例(年龄为38岁、孕龄为35孕周)穿透性胎盘植入患者的产前MRI检查结果(图4A:SSFSE矢状位图像;图4B:FIESTA矢状位图像)
[1]
杨慧霞,马京梅. 重视胎盘植入的及早诊断及规范化转诊[J]. 中华妇产科杂志,2019, 54(6): 361-362. DOI: 10.3760/cma.j.issn.0529-567x.2019.06.001.
[2]
Kilcoyne A, Shenoy-Bhangle AS, Roberts DJ, et al. MRI of placenta accreta, placenta increta, and placenta percreta: pearls and pitfalls [J]. AJR Am J Roentgenol, 2017, 208(1): 214-221. DOI: 10.2214/AJR.16.16281.
[3]
黄梦微,田蕾,杨永秀. 胎盘植入的治疗现状与进展[J]. 实用医学杂志,2019, 35(13): 2029-2034. DOI: 10.3969/j.issn.1006-5725.2019.13.001.
[4]
张玲,高晓艳,汪琼,等. 经腹超声和MRI在产前胎盘植入诊断中的价值探讨[J]. 中国计划生育学杂志,2018, 26(6): 487-490. DOI: 10.3969/j.issn.1004-8189.2018.06.015.
[5]
孔丽君,周莉,杨丽,等. 产前超声检查和磁共振成像对胎盘植入诊断的准确性评估[J]. 首都医科大学学报,2016, 37(2): 238-240. DOI: 10.3969/j.issn.1006-7795.2016.02.025.
[6]
郑小丽,徐坚民,杨敏洁. 晚孕期胎盘植入的MRI诊断及分型[J]. 放射学实践,2015, 30(3): 264-268. DOI: 10.13609/j.cnki.1000-0313.2015.03.013.
[7]
庄严,张国福,刘雪芬. 胎盘植入的MRI表现与漏误诊分析[J]. 放射学实践,2016, 31(10): 938-942. DOI: 10.13609/j.cnki.1000-0313.2016.10.008.
[8]
Dimassi K, Amor AB, Aissia NB, et al. OP27.08: Accuracy of placenta accreta prenatal diagnosis by ultrasound and MRI in a high-risk population [J]. Ultrasound Obstet Gynecol, 2016, 48(Suppl 1): 25-26. DOI: 10.1002/uog.16423.
[9]
梁娜,田伟. 胎盘植入的MRI间接征象分析[J]. 实用放射学杂志,2016, 32(1): 68-71. DOI: 10.3969/j.issn.1002-1671.2016.01.018.
[10]
龙光宇,陈天忠,冯廷越,等. 产前胎盘植入的MRI征象分析[J]. 中国医学计算机成像杂志,2017, 23(1): 77-81. DOI: 10.3969/j.issn.1006-5741.2017.01.015.
[11]
Sentilhes L, Kayem G, Chandraharan E, et al. FIGO consensus guidelines on placenta accreta spectrum disorders: conservative management [J]. Int J Gynecol Obstet, 2018, 140(3): 291-298. DOI: 10.1002/ijgo.12410.
[12]
da Cunha AC, da Silveira Betat R, Dal Pai TK, et al. Prenatal diagnosis of a true umbilical cord knot in a fetus with intrauterine growth restriction and placenta accreta [J]. Taiwan J Obstet Gynecology, 2016, 55(4): 616-617. DOI: 10.1016/j.tjog.2015.02.007.
[13]
连岩,王谢桐. 胎盘植入的保守性手术治疗[J]. 实用妇产科杂志,2013, 29(8): 565-568. DOI: 10.3969/j.issn.1003-6946.2013.08.003.
[14]
王芊芸,黄贝尔,杨慧霞. 胎盘植入发病机制的研究进展[J]. 中华围产医学杂志,2019, 22(1): 66-69. DOI: 10.3760/cma.j.issn.1007-9408.2019.01.014.
[15]
李笑天. 重视胎盘源性疾病提高母胎医学质量[J]. 中国实用妇科与产科杂志,2016, 32(4): 289-290. DOI: 10.7504/fk2016030101.
[16]
蔡霜婷,洪涛,周爱云. 产前超声诊断胎盘植入[J]. 中国医学影像技术,2015, 31(3): 438-441. DOI: 10.13929/j.1003-3289.2015.03.032.
[17]
梁旭. 产前MRI在胎盘植入中的诊断价值[J]. 放射学实践,2016, 31(2): 163-166. DOI: 10.13609/j.cnki.1000-0313.2016.02.016.
[18]
陈永露,宋亭,刘祎,等. 产前MRI在胎盘植入中的诊断价值[J]. 中国医学影像学杂志,2015, 23(6): 470-473. DOI: 10.3969/j.issn.1005-5185.2015.06.017.
[19]
Baughman WC, Corteville JE, Shah RR. Placenta accreta: spectrum of US and MR imaging findings [J]. Radio Graphics, 2008, 28(7): 1905-1916. DOI: 10.1148/rg.287085060.
[1] 杨水华, 何桂丹, 覃桂灿, 梁蒙凤, 罗艳合, 李雪芹, 唐娟松. 胎儿孤立性完全型肺静脉异位引流的超声心动图特征及高分辨率血流联合时间-空间相关成像的应用[J]. 中华医学超声杂志(电子版), 2023, 20(10): 1061-1067.
[2] 丁建民, 秦正义, 张翔, 周燕, 周洪雨, 王彦冬, 经翔. 超声造影与普美显磁共振成像对具有高危因素的≤3 cm肝结节进行LI-RADS分类诊断的前瞻性研究[J]. 中华医学超声杂志(电子版), 2023, 20(09): 930-938.
[3] 张莲莲, 惠品晶, 丁亚芳. 颈部血管超声在粥样硬化斑块易损性评估中的应用价值[J]. 中华医学超声杂志(电子版), 2023, 20(08): 816-821.
[4] 刘冰茹, 刘皓希, 陈莹, 赖世伟, 陈蓉. 疑似乳腺癌的韧带样纤维瘤病一例[J]. 中华乳腺病杂志(电子版), 2023, 17(05): 314-317.
[5] 陈甜甜, 王晓东, 余海燕. 双胎妊娠合并Gitelman综合征孕妇的妊娠结局及文献复习[J]. 中华妇幼临床医学杂志(电子版), 2023, 19(05): 559-568.
[6] 居晓庆, 金蕴洁, 王晓燕. 剖宫产术后瘢痕子宫患者再次妊娠阴道分娩发生子宫破裂的影响因素分析[J]. 中华妇幼临床医学杂志(电子版), 2023, 19(05): 575-581.
[7] 王蓓蓓, 董启秀, 郗红燕, 于庆云, 张丽君, 式光. 早孕期孕妇药物流产失败的影响因素分析与构建相关预测模型及其对药物流产成功的预测价值[J]. 中华妇幼临床医学杂志(电子版), 2023, 19(05): 588-594.
[8] 董晓燕, 赵琪, 唐军, 张莉, 杨晓燕, 李姣. 奥密克戎变异株感染所致新型冠状病毒感染疾病新生儿的临床特征分析[J]. 中华妇幼临床医学杂志(电子版), 2023, 19(05): 595-603.
[9] 陈絮, 詹玉茹, 王纯华. 孕妇ABO血型联合甲状腺功能检测对预测妊娠期糖尿病的临床价值[J]. 中华妇幼临床医学杂志(电子版), 2023, 19(05): 604-610.
[10] 周梦玲, 薛志伟, 周淑. 妊娠合并子宫肌瘤的孕期变化及其与不良妊娠结局的关系[J]. 中华妇幼临床医学杂志(电子版), 2023, 19(05): 611-615.
[11] 薛超, 张烨, 赵映, 韩建成, 谷孝艳, 孙琳, 刘晓伟, 宋伟, 何怡华. 胎儿先天性肺动脉瓣缺如综合征的超声特征及预后分析[J]. 中华妇幼临床医学杂志(电子版), 2023, 19(04): 410-418.
[12] 韩宇, 张武, 李安琪, 陈文颖, 谢斯栋. MRI肝脏影像报告和数据系统对非肝硬化乙肝患者肝细胞癌的诊断价值[J]. 中华肝脏外科手术学电子杂志, 2023, 12(06): 669-673.
[13] 雷漫诗, 邓锶锶, 汪昕蓉, 黄锦彬, 向青, 熊安妮, 孟占鳌. 人工智能辅助压缩感知技术在上腹部T2WI压脂序列中的应用[J]. 中华肝脏外科手术学电子杂志, 2023, 12(05): 551-556.
[14] 钟广俊, 刘春华, 朱万森, 徐晓雷, 王兆军. MRI联合不同扫描序列在胃癌术前分期诊断及化疗效果和预后的评估[J]. 中华消化病与影像杂志(电子版), 2023, 13(06): 378-382.
[15] 吴钰娴, 冯亚园, 霍雷, 贾宁阳, 张娟. 原发性肝脏淋巴瘤的影像学诊断价值研究[J]. 中华消化病与影像杂志(电子版), 2023, 13(05): 349-353.
阅读次数
全文


摘要