Cargando…

The Diagnostic Accuracy of Transabdominal and Transvaginal Color Doppler Ultrasound for Pregnant Women with Vasa Previa and Velamentous Cord Insertion

OBJECTIVE: The objective of this study is to evaluate feasibility and accuracy of transabdominal color Doppler ultrasound (TA-CDUS) and transvaginal color Doppler ultrasound (TV-CDUS) as screening methods for pregnant women with vasa previa (VP) and velamentous cord insertion (VCI). METHODS: A retro...

Descripción completa

Detalles Bibliográficos
Autores principales: Liu, Qing, Zhang, Qiang, Liu, Peiwu
Formato: Online Artículo Texto
Lenguaje:English
Publicado: Hindawi 2022
Materias:
Acceso en línea:https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC9536888/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/36213044
http://dx.doi.org/10.1155/2022/1685783
Descripción
Sumario:OBJECTIVE: The objective of this study is to evaluate feasibility and accuracy of transabdominal color Doppler ultrasound (TA-CDUS) and transvaginal color Doppler ultrasound (TV-CDUS) as screening methods for pregnant women with vasa previa (VP) and velamentous cord insertion (VCI). METHODS: A retrospective diagnostic accuracy study was performed on 5,434 pregnant women from 2018 to 2021, who underwent both TA-CDUS and TV-CDUS. Diagnostic performance of TA-CDUS and TV-CDUS was determined using specificity, positive predictive value (PPV), negative predictive value (NPV), accuracy, and positive and negative likelihood ratios (LR(+) and LR(−)), using the delivery information (gross examination) as the “Gold-standard”. Patient records were reviewed for demographics and diagnosis. RESULTS: The combination of VP and VCI was diagnosed in 37/5434 (0.68%) women at delivery. The sensitivity, specificity, PPV, NPV, and overall test accuracy of TA-CDUS were 72.97%, 99.85%, 77.14%, 99.81%, and 99.67%, respectively, for diagnosing VP with VCI. The corresponding values for TV-CDUS were 89.19%, 99.87%, 82.50%, 99.93%, and 99.80%, respectively. Moreover, the sensitivity of combination of TA-CDUS and TA-CDUS in determining VP with VCI was 97.30%, specificity 99.98%, PPV 97.30%, NPV 99.98%, and accuracy 99.96%. No significant difference in the misdiagnosis and missed diagnosis was found between the examination by TA-CDUS and TV-CDUS. CONCLUSIONS: Both TA-CDUS and TV-CDUS can be acceptable diagnostic tools for assessment of pregnant women with VP and VCI, with a better application of TV-CDUS with higher accuracy. The combination of TA-CDUS and TV-CDUS could provide an objective imaging basis for choosing clinical treatment strategies and predicting prognosis.