Chinese Medical E-ournals Database
Adv Search
中华妇幼临床医学杂志(电子版)

Chinese Journal of Obstetrics & Gynecology and Pediatrics(Electronic Edition) ›› 2020, Vol. 16 ›› Issue (02): 161 -170. doi: 10.3877/cma.j.issn.1673-5250.2020.02.007

Special Issue: ； ；

Standard · Proposal · Guideline

Interpretation of Society of Abdominal Radiology and European Society of Urogenital Radiology Joint Consensus Statement for MR Imaging of Placenta Accreta Spectrum Disorders

Xia Wang1, Fumin Zhao2, Yaqian Li1, Gang Ning2, Xiaodong Wang1,†()   

  1. 1. Department of Obstetrics and Gynecology, Key Laboratory of Birth Defects and Related Diseases of Women and Children (Sichuan University), Ministry of Education, West China Second University Hospital, Sichuan University, Chengdu 610041, Sichuan Province, China
    2. Department of Radiology, Key Laboratory of Birth Defects and Related Diseases of Women and Children (Sichuan University), Ministry of Education, West China Second University Hospital, Sichuan University, Chengdu 610041, Sichuan Province, China
  • Received:2020-02-25 Revised:2020-03-10 Published:2020-04-01
  • Corresponding author: Xiaodong Wang
  • About author:
    Corresponding author: Wang Xiaodong, Email:
  • Supported by:
    Key Research and Development Project of Science and Technology of Sichuan Province(2018SZ0265)
HTML ( ) PDF ( )

In February 2020, Society of Abdominal Radiology (SAR) and European Society of Urogenital Radiology (ESUR) Joint Consensus Statement for MR Imaging of Placenta Accreta Spectrum Disorders (PAS) which was led by radiologists at the University of California, San Francisco (UCSF), and in conjunction with the European Society of Radiology (ESR) was published online in journal of European Radiology. The consensus statement recommends use of standardized MRI technology to obtain PAS images; meanwhile, it is recommended to use 7 pieces of standardized technical terms to interpret MRI characteristics of PAS and issue a structured diagnostic report, including intraplacental dark T2 bands, placental/uterine bulge, loss of low T2 retroplacental line, myometrial thinning/disruption, bladder wall interruption, focal exophytic placental mass and abnormal vascularization of placental bed. At present, the incidence of PAS is high in China. The tertiary medical institutions and the vast majority of county-level medical institutions are equipped with MRI equipment. However, the clinical research and application of placental imaging diagnosis have not been standardized so far and cannot meet needs of clinical practice in China. The authors intend to interpret the main points of the SAR and ESUR joint consensus statement on MRI of PAS, in conjunction with the clinical practice of imaging diagnosis of PAS in China, and aim to provide a reference for MRI practice of PAS, so as to reach a multidisciplinary consensus and regulate perioperative management of PAS, relatively accurate identification of PAS types before birth by MRI criteria for placental invasion, formulate individualized multidisciplinary diagnosis and treatment plan for patients, try to avoid intraoperative accidents, and improve maternal and fetal outcomes.

Key words: Placenta accrete spectrum disorders, Magnetic resonance imaging, Perioperative management, Consensus, Pregnant women
表1 胎盘MRI检查条件和技术关键推荐概要
临床项目 推荐概要
硬件 采用外表面线圈为1.5 T或3.0 T的MRI硬件系统
患者准备 对PAS孕妇进行MRI检查的理想时间是孕龄为28～32孕周。检查时，孕妇取仰卧位、膀胱适度充盈，无需使用静脉钆基造影剂
成像序列及平面 经子宫矢状位、冠状位、轴位2维T2W HASTE/SSFSE序列多平面成像，对评估PAS是必不可少的。轴向斜平面T2W序列应垂直于胎盘-子宫肌层界面，推荐扫描层厚≤4 mm，不推荐使用T2W脂肪抑制序列
表2 对PAS孕妇的胎盘侵袭形态，采取1.5 T MRI检查的推荐方案
参数 稳态序列 T2半傅立叶序列 T1 3D序列脂肪饱和技术 DWI
轴位 冠状位/矢状位 轴位 冠状位/矢状位 矢状位 轴位 轴位/矢状位
重复时间/回波时间(ms) 3.31/1.36 3.51/1.41 800/85 800/87 4.27/1.56 4.35/1.61 3 200/75
翻转角度(°) 60 60 120 120 10 10 10
视野(mm) 320～400 320～400 320～400 430 320～400 320～400 320～400
矩阵 256×192 320×270 320×216 384×256 256×256 256×192 256×192
并行采集因子 2 2 2 2 3 2 2
层厚(mm) 4 4 4 4 3 3 5
层间距(mm) 0.9～1.0 0 0.9～1.0 0 0 0 0
每个成像叠块层数(层) 35 20～24 35 20～24 40 72 －
每个叠块扫描时间(s) 20～15 18～10 20～15 16 21～18 17 180
成像叠块数(块) 2～3 1 2～3 1 1 2 1
表3 对PAS孕妇的胎盘侵袭形态，采取3.0 T MRI检查的推荐方案
参数 SSFSE(轴位/冠状位/矢状位) LAVA-Flex或Dixon双回波(胎盘中心轴位) SSFSE[非螺旋桨技术，胎盘上方冠状位/高分辨率成像(视野缩小)] DWI(可选择，胎盘中心轴位和矢状位) T2 FSE(非螺旋桨技术，可选择，胎盘中心轴位和矢状位)
重复时间/回波时间(ms) 2 000/100 4.2/1.2 2 000/100 5 000/30.5 4 000/120(轴位)、11 000/74(矢状位)
翻转角度(°) － 15 － － 120(轴位)
激发次数(次) － 1 － 2 2
层厚/层间距(mm) 4/0 3/0 4/0 6/0 4/0
矩阵 384×256 260×256 384×256 80×80 320×256
视野(mm) 360 340 260～280 340 240
相位 右至左 前至后 右至左 － 右至左
过度采样 PE FOV 1.0 PE FOV 1.1 PE FOV 1.0 PE FOV 1 无相位卷褶
表4 文献复习总结辅助诊断PAS的MRI特点及其判读的标准化术语
MRI特点 定义 准确率(基于专家意见)
T2W胎盘内低信号带 T2WI可见胎盘内≥1个低信号区，一般呈线性结构，常连接胎盘母体面 90%(95%CI：65%～93%)
胎盘/子宫膨出 胎盘组织向邻近器官，通常为膀胱和宫旁组织膨出，导致子宫浆膜偏离正常位置。子宫浆膜可能完整，但是其轮廓、形态异常 100%(95%CI：92%～100%)
T2W低信号线消失 T2WI可看到胎盘床后面的一条低信号细线消失 90%(95%CI：84%～96%)
子宫肌层变薄 胎盘附着部位子宫肌层变薄，可仅为<1 mm，甚至不可见 90%(95%CI：87%～95%)
膀胱壁中断 正常的低信号膀胱壁不规则或中断，可伴随膀胱腔内积血形成 100%(95%CI：97%～100%)
局部外生团块 可见胎盘组织突出于子宫壁，并进一步延伸超过子宫壁。最常见胎盘组织部分或全部充满膀胱腔，或向侧面突向宫旁组织 95%(95%CI：95%～100%)
胎盘床异生血管 胎盘床血管增多，伴随子宫胎盘界面中断。胎盘床异生血管可能以不同程度延伸至附着部位子宫肌层，甚至到达子宫浆膜，并可能伴有膀胱、子宫和阴道周围的新生血管形成 100%(95%CI：96%～100%)
胎盘内信号不均 在T1W和T2W序列上，可见胎盘内信号不均匀分布 70%(95%CI：58%～81%)
胎盘不对称增厚/形状 与其他位置胎盘组织相比，PAS孕妇的胎盘，通常是覆盖子宫内口的部位(在前置胎盘情况下)，发生不对称增厚/形状 50%(95%CI：39%～61%)
胎盘缺血性梗死 在胎盘缺血性梗死急性期，出现T2W高信号区和TIW低信号区；在胎盘缺血性梗死非急性期，可见胎盘慢性梗死部位，出现缺血不对称变薄 60%(95%CI：49%～70%)
胎盘内异常血管 在T2WI上，可见胎盘内部深处弯曲、扩大的血管流空的胎盘内异常血管 70%(95%CI：65%～79%)
图1 正常胎盘和子宫肌层MRI特点示意图
图2 PAS孕妇胎盘MRI检查可见T2W胎盘内低信号带[图2A：PAS孕妇胎盘MRI检查的T2W胎盘内低信号带示意图。PAS孕妇胎盘边缘不规则的低信号条带，通常与胎盘母体面相连。图2B：胎盘轴位MRI特点，可见多个T2W胎盘内低信号带(箭头所示)，并且与胎盘胎儿面相连。图2C：宫颈矢状位MRI特点，可见前置胎盘]
图3 PAS孕妇胎盘MRI检查可见胎盘/子宫膨出[图3A：PAS孕妇胎盘MRI检查的胎盘/子宫膨出示意图。PAS胎盘组织异常膨出，引起子宫浆膜偏离正常位置，通常伴有膨出区域的子宫肌层变薄。图3B：PAS孕妇胎盘矢状位MRI特点，可见胎盘组织异常膨出(箭头所示)，使子宫浆膜偏离正常位置，轮廓形状变形，胎盘内还可见信号不均匀的T2W暗带和异常血管]
图4 PAS孕妇胎盘MRI检查可见胎盘后低信号线消失[图4A：PAS孕妇胎盘MRI检查的胎盘后低信号线消失示意图。PAS胎盘、子宫界面内层连续，线性T2低信号蜕膜层消失。图4B：PAS孕妇胎盘矢状位MRI特点，可见胎盘床后T2低信号线消失(白色箭头所示)，正常胎盘、子宫肌层界面T2低信号线(黑色箭头所示)]
图5 PAS孕妇胎盘MRI检查可见子宫肌层变薄[图5A：PAS孕妇胎盘MRI检查的子宫肌层变薄示意图。PAS胎盘附着部位子宫肌层变薄至厚度<1 mm，甚至不可见(变薄程度可不相同)。图5B：PAS孕妇轴位MRI检查，可见子宫肌层外层/子宫浆膜T2W低信号线(白色箭头所示)，但是胎盘子宫界面内层低信号线消失，可见正常胎盘子宫肌层"三明治"分层表现(黑色箭头所示)，子宫肌层内可见多个低信号流空血管影]
图6 PAS孕妇胎盘MRI检查可见低信号膀胱壁不规则或中断[图6A：PAS孕妇胎盘MRI检查的低信号膀胱壁不规则或中断示意图。PAS胎盘组织侵入膀胱顶，导致膀胱壁中断。图6B、6C：PAS孕妇胎盘矢状位MRI特点，可见胎盘侵入膀胱顶，引起低信号膀胱壁中断(黑色箭头所示)；可见弯曲的低信号流空血管影(短白色箭头所示)，以及膀胱"帐篷征"(长白色箭头所示)]
图7 PAS孕妇胎盘MRI检查可见局灶外生团块[图7A：PAS孕妇胎盘MRI检查的局灶外生团块示意图。PAS胎盘组织穿透子宫壁向外突出，呈局部外生团块。图7B：PAS孕妇胎盘轴位MRI特点，可见胎盘向宫旁组织突出，并呈团块状外观(箭头所示)]
图8 PAS孕妇胎盘MRI检查可见胎盘床异生血管[图8A：PAS孕妇胎盘MRI检查的胎盘床异生血管示意图。PAS孕妇胎盘床明显增多的血管，伴胎盘子宫界面内层信号线中断。图8B：PAS孕妇胎盘矢状位MRI特点，可见胎盘床明显增多的血管影(长箭头所示)，伴胎盘子宫界面中断，还可见向子宫肌层延伸至子宫浆膜的血管影(短箭头所示)。图8C：PAS孕妇胎盘轴位MRI特点，可见胎盘床明显增多的血管影(箭头所示)]
图9 PAS孕妇胎盘MRI检查可见胎盘内信号不均[图9A：PAS孕妇胎盘MRI检查的胎盘内信号不均示意图。PAS胎盘内除T2W低信号带及异常血管以外的信号不均匀改变。图9B：PAS孕妇胎盘冠状位MRI特点，可见胎盘呈信号不均匀表现，可见T2W低信号带(箭头所示)及异常血管影]
图10 PAS孕妇胎盘MRI检查可见胎盘不对称增厚/形状[图10A：PAS孕妇胎盘MRI检查的胎盘不对称增厚/形状示意图。PAS胎盘不对称增厚/形状，可伴其他特征表现，如T2W低信号带。图10B：PAS孕妇胎盘矢状位MRI特点，可见与正常部位胎盘(黑色箭头所示)相比，植入部位胎盘出现不均匀增厚(白色箭头所示)]
图11 PAS孕妇胎盘MRI检查可见胎盘缺血性梗死[图11A：PAS孕妇胎盘MRI检查的胎盘缺血性梗死示意图。PAS胎盘因梗死区域胎盘组织局部丢失而异常变薄。图11B：PAS孕妇胎盘矢状位MRI特点，可见慢性梗死部位胎盘呈不对称变薄(箭头指示)，小部分变薄的胎盘组织仍存在可排除副胎盘可能性]
图12 PAS孕妇胎盘MRI检查可见胎盘内血管异常[图12A：PAS孕妇胎盘MRI检查的胎盘内血管异常示意图。正常胎盘内无大的流空血管影，PAS胎盘深处出现弯曲、扩大的流空血管影，胎盘深处的血管极度不正常，尤其在远离脐带插入部位。图12B：PAS孕妇胎盘冠状位MRI特点，可见胎盘深处异常血管和弯曲、扩大的流空血管影(箭头指示)]
图13 MRI检查可见将子宫划分为S1和S2区域[矢状位MRI特点，垂直于膀胱后壁中央的直线，将子宫划分为直线上方的S1区域和直线下方的S2区域。在S2区域可见子宫肌层信号中断(白色箭头所示)]
表5 PAS孕妇胎盘MRI检查结果的结构化报告
结构化报告项目 结构化报告项目
临床诊断报告项目a 胎盘侵袭检测b
? 年龄 ? 胎盘内T2低信号带
? 孕龄 ? 胎盘/子宫膨出
? 剖宫产术分娩史、次数 ? 胎盘后T2低信号线消失
? 相关超声检查结果报告(如果有) ? 子宫肌层变薄
MRI检查报告项目 ? 膀胱壁中断
? 是否存在前置胎盘 ? 局部外生团块
? 胎盘侵袭位置 ? 胎盘床异生血管
MRI：胎盘侵袭深度 ? 胎盘内信号不均
? PA或PI ? 胎盘不对称增厚/形状
? PP ? 胎盘缺血性梗死
胎盘侵袭至子宫外MRI特点 ? 胎盘内异常血管
? 膀胱受累：累及部位及结构 MRI：胎盘侵袭部位c
? 宫旁受累：累及部位及结构 ? ?
[1]
Jauniaux E, Chantraine F, Silver RM, et al. FIGO Placenta Accreta Diagnosis and Management Expert Consensus Panel. FIGO consensus guidelines on placenta accreta spectrum disorders: epidemiology [J]. Int J Gynaecol Obstet, 2018, 140(3): 265-273. DOI: 10.1002/ijgo.12407.
[2]
Solheim KN, Esakoff TF, Little SE, et al. The effect of cesarean delivery rates on the future incidence of placenta previa, placenta accreta, and maternal mortality [J]. J Matern Fetal Neonatal Med, 2011, 24(11): 1341-1346. DOI: 10.3109/14767058.2011.553695.
[3]
Bodelon C, Bernabe-Ortiz A, Schiff MA, et al. Factors associated with peripartum hysterectomy [J]. Obstet Gynecol, 2009, 114(4): 927. DOI: 10.1097/AOG.0b013e3181ba039c.
[4]
Jin R, Guo Y, Chen Y. Risk factors associated with emergency peripartum hysterectomy [J]. Chin Med J (Engl), 2014, 127(5): 900-904. DOI: 10.3760/cma.j.issn.0366-6999.20132023.
[5]
Committee on Obstetric Practice. Committee opinion No. 529: placenta accreta [J]. Obstet Gynecol, 2012, 120(1): 207-211. DOI: 10.1097/AOG.0b013e318262e340.
[6]
张佳妮，牟祎，刘娜，等. 《孕期和产褥期孕产妇衰竭指南(2019)》要点解读[J/CD]. 中华妇幼临床医学杂志(电子版), 2020, 16(1): 23-31. DOI: 10.3877/cma.j.issn.1673-5250.2020.01.004.
[7]
Shamshirsaz AA, Fox KA, Salmanian B, et al. Maternal morbidity in patients with morbidly adherent placenta treated with and without a standardized multidisciplinary approach [J]. Am J Obstet Gynecol, 2015, 212(2): 218.e1-e9. DOI: 10.1016/j.ajog.2014.08.019.
[8]
Sentilhes L, Kayem G, Chandraharan E, et al. FIGO Placenta Accreta Diagnosis and Management Expert Consensus Panel. FIGO consensus guidelines on placenta accreta spectrum disorders: conservative management [J]. Int J Gynaecol, 2018, 140(3): 291-298. DOI: 10.1002/ijgo.12410.
[9]
Allen L, Jauniaux E, Hobson S, et al. FIGO Placenta Accreta Diagnosis and Management Expert Consensus Panel. FIGO consensus guidelines on placenta accreta spectrum disorders: nonconservative surgical management [J]. Int J Gynaecol Obstet, 2018, 140(3): 281-290. DOI: 10.1002/ijgo.12409.
[10]
Jauniaux E, Bhide A, Kennedy A, et al. FIGO Placenta Accreta Diagnosis and Management Expert Consensus Panel. FIGO consensus guidelines on placenta accreta spectrum disorders: prenatal diagnosis and screening [J]. Int J Gynaecol, 2018, 140(3): 274-280. DOI: 10.1002/ijgo.12408.
[11]
Jha P, Pōder L, Bourgioti C, et al. Society of Abdominal Radiology (SAR) and European Society of Urogenital Radiology (ESUR) joint consensus statement for MR imaging of placenta accreta spectrum disorders [J]. Eur Radiol, 2020, 30(5): 2604-2615. DOI: 10.1007/s00330-019-06617-7.
[12]
Society of Gynecologic Oncology, American College of Obstetricians and Gynecologists and the Society for Maternal-Fetal Medicine, Cahill AG, et al. Placenta accreta spectrum[J]. Am J Obstet Gynecol, 2018, 219(6): B2-B16. DOI: 10.1016/j.ajog.2018.09.042.
[13]
Morel O, Collins SL, Uzan-Augui J, et al. International Society for Abnormally Invasive Placenta (IS-AIP). A proposal for standardized magnetic resonance imaging (MRI) descriptors of abnormally invasive placenta (AIP)-from the International Society for AIP [J]. Diagn Interv Imaging, 2019, 100(6): 319-325. DOI: 10.1016/j.diii.2019.02.004.
[14]
戴钟英. 侵入性胎盘的命名、发生率及病因[J]. 实用妇产科杂志，2008, 24(12): 705-707. DOI: 10.3969/j.issn.1003-6946.2008.12.001.
[15]
贺芳，陈敦金. 胎盘植入诊治面临的挑战与策略[J]. 中国实用妇科与产科杂志，2016, 32(4): 315-318. DOI: 10.7504/fk2016030107.
[16]
杨慧霞. 改进穿透性胎盘植入患者预后的综合管理措施[J]. 中国实用妇科与产科杂志，2020, 36(1): 50-53. DOI: 10.19538/j.fk2020010112.
[17]
龚娜，杨健. MRI评价胎盘功能的应用进展[J]. 中国医学影像技术，2016, 32(11): 1777-1780. DOI: 10.13929/j.1003-3289.2016.11.040.
[18]
Expert Panel on MR Safety, Kanal E, Barkovich AJ, et al. ACR guidance document on MR safe practices: 2013 [J]. J Magn Reson Imaging, 2013, 37(3): 501-530. DOI: 10.1002/jmri.24011.
[19]
Ray JG, Vermeulen MJ, Bharatha A, et al. Association between MRI exposure during pregnancy and fetal and childhood outcomes [J]. JAMA, 2016, 316(9): 952-961. DOI: 10.1001/jama.2016.12126.
[20]
Horowitz JM, Berggruen S, McCarthy RJ, et al. When timing is everything: are placental MRI examinations performed before 24 weeks′ gestational age reliable? [J]. AJR Am J Roentgenol, 2015, 205(3): 685-692. DOI: 10.2214/AJR.14.14134.
[21]
Zaghal AA, Hussain HK, Berjawi GA. MRI evaluation of the placenta from normal variants to abnormalities of implantation and malignancies [J]. J Magn Reson Imaging, 2019, 50(6): 1702-1717. DOI: 10.1002/jmri.26764.
[22]
Goergen SK, Posma E, Wrede D, et al. Inter observer agreement and diagnostic performance of individual MRI criteria for diagnosis of placental adhesion disorders [J]. Clin Radiol, 2018, 73(10): 908.e1-908.e9. DOI: 10.1016/j.crad.2018.05.021.
[23]
Lim PS, Greenberg M, Edelson MI, et al. Utility of ultrasound and MRI in prenatal diagnosis of placenta accreta: a pilot study [J]. AJR Am J Roentgenol, 2011, 197(6): 1506-1513. DOI: 10.2214/AJR.11.6858.
[24]
Familiari A, Liberati M, Lim P, et al. Diagnostic accuracy of magnetic resonance imaging in detecting the severity of abnormal invasive placenta: a systematic review and Meta-analysis [J]. Acta Obstet Gynecol Scand, 2018, 97(5): 507-520. DOI: 10.1111/aogs.13258.
[25]
Chen T, Xu XQ, Shi HB, et al. Conventional MRI features for predicting the clinical outcome of patients with invasive placenta [J]. Diagn Interv Radiol, 2017, 23(3): 173-179. DOI: 10.5152/dir.2016.16412.
[26]
Alamo L, Anaye A, Rey J, et al. Detection of suspected placental invasion by MRI: do the results depend on observer′ experience? [J]. Eur J Radiol, 2013, 82(2): e51-e57. DOI: 10.1016/j.ejrad.2012.08.022.
[27]
Jha P, Rabban J, Chen LM, et al. Placenta accreta spectrum: value of placental bulge as a sign of myometrial invasion on MR imaging [J]. Abdom Radiol (NY), 2019, 44(7): 2572-2581. DOI: 10.1007/s00261-019-02008-0.
[28]
Allen BC, Leyendecker JR. Placental evaluation with magnetic resonance [J]. Radiol Clin North Am, 2013, 51(6): 955-966. DOI: 10.1016/j.rcl.2013.07.009.
[29]
Bour L, Placé V, Bendavid S, et al. Suspected invasive placenta: evaluation with magneticresonance imaging [J]. Eur Radiol, 2014, 24(12): 3150-3160. DOI：10.1007/s00330-014-3354-z.
[30]
Masselli G, Gualdi G. MR imaging of the placenta: what a radiologist should know [J]. Abdom Imaging, 2013, 38(3): 573-587. DOI: 10.1007/s00261-012-9929-8.
[31]
Elsayes KM, Trout AT, Friedkin AM, et al. Imaging of the placenta: a multimodality pictorial review [J]. Radiographics, 2009, 29(5): 1371-1391. DOI: 10.1148/rg.295085242.
[32]
Bourgioti C, Zafeiropoulou K, Fotopoulos S, et al. MRI features predictive of invasive placenta with extrauterine spread in high-risk gravid patients: a prospective evaluation [J]. AJR Am J Roentgenol, 2018, 211(3): 701-711. DOI: 10.2214/AJR.17.19303.
[33]
Chantraine F, Blacher S, Berndt S, et al. Abnormal vascular architecture at the placental-maternal interface in placenta increta [J]. Am J Obstet Gynecol, 2012, 207(3): 188.e1-e9. DOI: 10.1016/j.ajog.2012.06.083.
[34]
Jauniaux E, Collins SL, Jurkovic D, et al. Accreta placentation: a systematic review of prenatal ultrasound imaging and grading of villous invasiveness [J]. Am J Obstet Gynecol, 2016, 215(6): 712-721. DOI: 10.1016/j.ajog.2016.07.044.
[35]
Palacios-Jaraquemada JM. Caesarean section in cases of placenta praevia and accreta [J]. Best Pract Res Clin Obstet Gynaecol, 2013, 27(2): 221-232. DOI：10.1016/j.bpobgyn.2012.10.003.
[36]
Bourgioti C, Zafeiropoulou K, Fotopoulos S, et al. MRI prognosticators for adverse maternal and neonatal clinicaloutcome in patients at high risk for placenta accreta spectrum (PAS) disorders [J]. J Magn Reson Imaging, 2019, 50(2): 602-618. DOI: 10.1002/jmri.26592.
[37]
Palacios-Jaraquemada JM, Bruno CH, Martín E. MRI in the diagnosis and surgical management of abnormal placentation [J]. Acta Obstet Gynecol Scand, 2013, 92(4): 392-397. DOI: 10.1111/j.1600-0412.2012.01527.x.
[38]
Huang G, Wang X, Yu H, et al. A new surgical technique " cervical internal osplasty" in cesarean delivery for placenta previa accreta: a case-control study [J]. Medicine (Baltimore), 2019, 98(9): e14488. DOI: 10.1097/MD.0000000000014488.
[39]
Chen M, Liu X, You Y, et al.InternalIliac artery balloon occlusion for placenta previa and suspected placenta accreta: arandomized controlled trial[J]. Obstet Gynecol, 2020, 135(5): 1112-1119. DOI: 10.1097/AOG.0000000000003792.PubMedPMID：32282608.
[1] Lianlian Zhang, Pinjing Hui, Yafang Ding. Clinical value of carotid Doppler ultrasonography in assessing vulnerability of atherosclerotic plaques[J]. Chinese Journal of Medical Ultrasound (Electronic Edition), 2023, 20(08): 816-821.
[2] Tiantian Chen, Xiaodong Wang, Haiyan Yu. Pregnancy outcome of twin pregnancy with Gitelman syndrome: a case report and literature review[J]. Chinese Journal of Obstetrics & Gynecology and Pediatrics(Electronic Edition), 2023, 19(05): 559-568.
[3] Xiaoqing Ju, Yunjie Jin, Xiaoyan Wang. Influencing factors of uterine rupture during vaginal delivery in patients with scarred uterus after cesarean section[J]. Chinese Journal of Obstetrics & Gynecology and Pediatrics(Electronic Edition), 2023, 19(05): 575-581.
[4] Beibei Wang, Qixiu Dong, Hongyan Xi, Qingyun Yu, Lijun Zhang, Guang Shi. Analysis of influencing factors of medical abortion failure of pregnant women in early pregnancy and construction of related prediction model and its predictive value for medical abortion success[J]. Chinese Journal of Obstetrics & Gynecology and Pediatrics(Electronic Edition), 2023, 19(05): 588-594.
[5] Xiaoyan Dong, Qi Zhao, Jun Tang, Li Zhang, Xiaoyan Yang, Jiao Li. Clinical characteristics of neonates infected with the Omicron variant of severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2[J]. Chinese Journal of Obstetrics & Gynecology and Pediatrics(Electronic Edition), 2023, 19(05): 595-603.
[6] Xu Chen, Yuru Zhan, Chunhua Wang. Clinical value of ABO blood group combined with thyroid function in prediction of gestational diabetes mellitus[J]. Chinese Journal of Obstetrics & Gynecology and Pediatrics(Electronic Edition), 2023, 19(05): 604-610.
[7] Mengling Zhou, Zhiwei Xue, Shu Zhou. Changes in size of uterine myoma during pregnancy and its association with adverse pregnancy outcomes[J]. Chinese Journal of Obstetrics & Gynecology and Pediatrics(Electronic Edition), 2023, 19(05): 611-615.
[8] Pediatric Burn Study Group, Burn Surgery Branch of Chinese Medical Association. Expert consensus on fluid resuscitation of early pediatric burn shock (version 2023)[J]. Chinese Journal of Injury Repair and Wound Healing(Electronic Edition), 2023, 18(05): 371-376.
[9] Yu Han, Wu Zhang, Anqi Li, Wenying Chen, Sidong Xie. Diagnostic value of MRI Liver Image Reporting and Data System (LI-RADS) for hepatocellular carcinoma in patients with non-cirrhotic hepatitis B[J]. Chinese Journal of Hepatic Surgery(Electronic Edition), 2023, 12(06): 669-673.
[10] Manshi Lei, Sisi Deng, Xinrong Wang, Jinbin Huang, Qing Xiang, Anni Xiong, Zhan'ao Meng. Application of artificial intelligence-assisted compression sensing technology in upper abdominal fat-suppressed T2WI sequence[J]. Chinese Journal of Hepatic Surgery(Electronic Edition), 2023, 12(05): 551-556.
[11] . Expert consensus on perioperative management of day surgery for hip and knee arthroplasty in China[J]. Chinese Journal of Geriatric Orthopaedics and Rehabilitation(Electronic Edition), 2023, 09(06): 321-332.
[12] Guangjun Zhong, Chunhua Liu, Wansen Zhu, Xiaolei Xu, Zhaojun Wang. Application of conventional MRI combined with different scanning sequences in preoperative staging diagnosis, chemotherapy efficacy and prognosis evaluation of gastric cancer[J]. Chinese Journal of Digestion and Medical Imageology(Electronic Edition), 2023, 13(06): 378-382.
[13] Baoru Hu, Naijian Shang, Di Gao. DCE-MRI and DWI findings of advanced hepatocellular carcinoma and their correlation with prognosis after immunotherapy[J]. Chinese Journal of Digestion and Medical Imageology(Electronic Edition), 2023, 13(06): 399-403.
[14] Yuxian Wu, Yayuan Feng, Lei Huo, Ningyang Jia, Juan Zhang. Study on the diagnostic value of imaging in primary hepatic lymphoma[J]. Chinese Journal of Digestion and Medical Imageology(Electronic Edition), 2023, 13(05): 349-353.
[15] Writing Group for Clinical Expert Consensus on Venolymphatic Insufficiency Related Disease. Clinical expert consensus on venolymphatic insufficiency related diseases[J]. Chinese Journal of Clinicians(Electronic Edition), 2023, 17(06): 630-638.
Viewed
Full text


Abstract

Copyright © Chinese Medical Association, Chinese Medical Multimedia Press  京ICP备14006079号-1  网络出版服务许可证：(署)网出证(京)字第075号