Shear wave elastography of the uterine cervix under different conditions with inter-operator agreement analysis.
cervix
elastography
shear wave
transvaginal ultrasound
Journal
Polish journal of radiology
ISSN: 1733-134X
Titre abrégé: Pol J Radiol
Pays: Poland
ID NLM: 101175532
Informations de publication
Date de publication:
2020
2020
Historique:
received:
01
01
2020
accepted:
19
03
2020
entrez:
3
7
2020
pubmed:
3
7
2020
medline:
3
7
2020
Statut:
epublish
Résumé
Shear wave elastography (SWE) is a relatively new technique for measuring tissue elasticity. Its implementation for assessing the tissue of the cervix is evolving, and SWE analyses of healthy, nonpregnant cervixes is the first step in understanding other SWE changes related to cervical pathologies; nevertheless, some challenges in the use of the technique still require investigation. We aimed to target the consistency of healthy cervix shear wave elastography measurements and examine the changes induced by patient-related factors. Elastograms were obtained at the internal and external os in the anterior (IA, EA) and posterior (IP, EP) portions of the cervix using a transvaginal approach in eight postmenopausal and 25 premenopausal women. Measurements with a standard deviation of over 20% and patients who presented with colour loss or heterogeneity were excluded from the study. Shear wave elastography assessments were performed using a Toshiba Aplio 500 version 6. Statistical significance was defined as a p value less than 0.10, due to the small number of patients. The mean speeds obtained at the external os on the anterior and posterior aspects was 3.17 ± 0.85 m/s and 3.18 ± 0.84 m/s, respectively, and at the internal os, the results on the anterior and posterior aspects were 3.38 ± 0.73 m/s and 3.53 ± 0.81 m/s, respectively. The difference in speed among all regions was statistically significant ( The posterior portion of the internal os is most likely to undergo inaccurate SWE measurement among the different anatomical positions. The correlation between radiologists was found to be different for different locations in the cervix. More studies are needed to determine the SWE values of the healthy cervix and the agreement levels between radiologists.
Identifiants
pubmed: 32612722
doi: 10.5114/pjr.2020.95527
pii: 40717
pmc: PMC7315054
doi:
Types de publication
Journal Article
Langues
eng
Pagination
e245-e249Informations de copyright
Copyright © Polish Medical Society of Radiology 2020.
Déclaration de conflit d'intérêts
The authors report no conflict of interest.
Références
Ultrasound Obstet Gynecol. 2011 Jul;38(1):52-6
pubmed: 21484905
J Ultrasound Med. 2019 Dec;38(12):3173-3181
pubmed: 31066099
J Perinat Med. 2013 Jul;41(4):421-7
pubmed: 23392904
Ultrasound Obstet Gynecol. 2013 Feb;41(2):152-61
pubmed: 23151941
Ultrasound Obstet Gynecol. 2012 Jun;39(6):685-9
pubmed: 22173854
Breast Cancer Res Treat. 2011 Nov;130(1):11-8
pubmed: 21870128
Acad Radiol. 2007 Feb;14(2):193-200
pubmed: 17236992
Ultraschall Med. 2017 Aug;38(4):395-402
pubmed: 26251994
Ultrasound Obstet Gynecol. 2015 Jul;46(1):93-8
pubmed: 25200374
J Ultrasound Med. 2019 Apr;38(4):1049-1060
pubmed: 30208228
Ultrasound Obstet Gynecol. 2006 Sep;28(3):356-7
pubmed: 16909409
J Perinat Med. 2005;33(5):383-91
pubmed: 16238532
Ultraschall Med. 2013 Apr;34(2):169-84
pubmed: 23558397
J Perinat Med. 2014 Sep;42(5):549-57
pubmed: 25029081
J Obstet Gynaecol Res. 2017 Sep;43(9):1405-1410
pubmed: 28691320
Semin Perinatol. 2017 Dec;41(8):477-484
pubmed: 29191290
J Ultrasound Med. 2019 Dec;38(12):3183-3189
pubmed: 31077426
J Ultrasound Med. 2011 Sep;30(9):1259-66
pubmed: 21876097
Ultrasound. 2018 Feb;26(1):54-62
pubmed: 29456583
Ultrasound Q. 2010 Jun;26(2):61-6
pubmed: 20498561
Ultrasound Obstet Gynecol. 2014 Apr;43(4):452-8
pubmed: 23836486
Acta Radiol. 2018 Jun;59(6):755-762
pubmed: 28882058