Skip to main content

Advertisement

SpringerLink
Log in

Strain elastography in placental dysfunction: placental elasticity differences in normal and preeclamptic pregnancies in the second trimester

  • Maternal-Fetal Medicine
  • Published:
Archives of Gynecology and Obstetrics Aims and scope Submit manuscript

Abstract

Purpose

The aim of this study is to determine if the Strain elastography (SE) of the placenta measured in the second trimester differs between normal pregnancies and pregnancies complicated by preeclampsia (PE).

Methods

219 singleton pregnancies who had routine anomaly scanning between the 20th and 23rd weeks of gestation were included in this observational study. Women with either posterior placentations (n = 63) or other obstetric pathologies (n = 12) were excluded from the study, leaving 144 pregnant women for the evaluation of strain ratio with SE. One hundred and one women with normal pregnancies and normal deliveries without any perinatal complications formed Group A. Twenty-eight patients who were clinically diagnosed with early onset PE before anomaly scanning formed Group B. Fifteen normotensive pregnant women with either mild proteinuria, and past history of preeclampsia during their previous pregnancies formed Group C. The strain ratios were compared between the groups.

Results

The strain ratio of Group B was significantly higher than those of Group A and Group C (p < 0.05).

Conclusions

The placental elasticity ratios measured by SE imaging during the second trimester differ between the normal pregnancies and the pregnancies complicated by PE. SE might be used as a supplement tool in addition to the existing methods for the prediction of PE.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this article

Log in via an institution

Price excludes VAT (USA)
Tax calculation will be finalised during checkout.

Instant access to the full article PDF.

Institutional subscriptions

Fig. 1
Fig. 2
Fig. 3

Similar content being viewed by others

References

  1. Kauer M, Vuskovic V, Dual J, Szekely G, Bajka M (2002) Inverse finite element characterization of soft tissues. Med Image Anal 6(3):275–287

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  2. Wells PN, Liang HD (2011) Medical ultrasound: imaging of soft tissue strain and elasticity. J R Soc Interface 8(64):1521–1549

    Article  PubMed Central  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  3. Tan S, Ozcan MF, Tezcan F, Balci S, Karaoğlanoğlu M, Huddam B, Arslan H (2013) Real-time elastography for distinguishing angiomyolipoma from renal cell carcinoma: preliminary observations. AJR Am J Roentgenol 200(4):W369–W375

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  4. Arda K, Ciledag N, Gumusdag P (2010) Differential diagnosis of malignant cervical lymph nodes at real-time ultrasonographic elastography and Doppler ultrasonography. Hung Radiol Online 6:12–15

    Google Scholar 

  5. Friedrich-Rust M, Ong MF, Herrmann E, Dries V, Samaras P, Zeuzem S, Sarrazin C (2007) Real-time elastography for noninvasive assessment of liver fibrosis in chronic viral hepatitis. AJR Am J Roentgenol 188(3):758–764

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  6. Itoh A, Ueno E, Tohno E, Kamma H, Takahashi H, Shiina T, Yamakawa M, Matsumura T (2006) Breast disease: clinical application of US elastography for diagnosis. Radiology 239:341–350

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  7. Trimboli P, Guglielmi R, Monti S et al (2012) Ultrasound sensitivity for thyroid malignancy is increased by real-time elastography: a prospective multicenter study. J Clin Endocrinol Metab 97(12):4524–4530

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  8. König K, Scheipers U, Pesavento A, Lorenz A, Ermert H, Senge T (2005) Initial experiences with real-time elastography guided biopsies of the prostate. J Urol 174:115–117

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  9. Ishikawa D, Ando T, Watanabe O et al (2011) Images of colonic real-time tissues on elastography correlate with those of colonoscopy and may predict response to therapy in patients with ulcerative colitis. BMC Gastroenterol 11:29. doi:10.1186/1471-230X-11-29

    Article  PubMed Central  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  10. Giovannini M, Botelberge T, Bories E et al (2009) Endoscopic ultrasound elastography for evaluation of lymph nodes and pancreatic masses: a multicenter study. World J Gastroenterol 15:1587–1593

    Article  PubMed Central  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  11. Stoelinga B, Hehenkamp WJ, Brölmann HA, Huirne JA (2014) The use of real-time elastography in the assessment of uterine disorders. Ultrasound Obstet Gynecol 43(2):218–226

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  12. Fuchs T, Pomorski M, Zimmer M (2013) Quantitative cervical elastography in pregnancy. Ultrasound Obstet Gynecol 41(6):712

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  13. Yu CK, Khouri O, Onwudiwe N, Spiliopoulos Y, Nicolaides KH, Fetal Medicine Foundation Second-Trimester Screening Group (2008) Prediction of pre-eclampsia by uterine artery Doppler imaging: relationship to gestational age at delivery and small-for-gestational age. Ultrasound Obstet Gynecol 31(3):310–313

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  14. Murphy DJ, Striate GM (2000) Mortality and morbidity associated with early-onset preeclampsia. Hypertens Pregnancy 19:221–231

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  15. Valensise H, Vasapollo B, Gagliardi G, Novelli GP (2008) Early and late preeclampsia: two different maternal hemodynamic states in the latent phase of the disease. Hypertension 52(5):873–880

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  16. Harrington K, Cooper D, Lees C, Hecher K, Campbell S (1996) Doppler ultrasound of the uterine arteries: the importance of bilateral notching in the prediction of pre-eclampsia, placental abruption or delivery of a small-for-gestational-age baby. Ultrasound Obstet Gynecol 7(3):182–188

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  17. Grill S, Rusterholz C, Zanetti-Dällenbach R, Tercanli S, Holzgreve W, Hahn S, Lapaire O (2009) Potential markers of preeclampsia—a review. Reprod Biol Endocrinol 14(7):70

    Article  Google Scholar 

  18. Hladunewich M, Karumanchi SA, Lafayette R (2007) Pathophysiology of the clinical manifestations of preeclampsia. Clin J Am Soc Nephrol 2(3):543–549

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  19. Li WJ, Wei ZT, Yan RL, Zhang YL (2012) Detection of placenta elasticity modulus by quantitative real-time shear wave imaging. Clin Exp Obstet Gynecol 39(4):470–473

    CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  20. Sugitani M, Fujita Y, Yumoto Y, Fukushima K, Takeuchi T, Shimokawa M, Kato K (2013) A new method for measurement of placental elasticity: acoustic radiation force impulse imaging. Placenta 34(11):1009–1013

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  21. Frey H (2003) Real-time elastography: a new ultrasound procedure for the reconstruction of tissue elasticity. Radiology 43:850–855

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  22. Srinivasan S, Kallel F, Ophir J (2002) The effects of digitization on the elastographic signal-to-noise ratio. Ultrasound Med Biol 28:1521–1534

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  23. Bamber J, Cosgrove D, Dietrich CF et al (2013) EFSUMB guidelines and recommendations on the clinical use of ultrasound elastography. Part 1: basic principles and technology. Ultraschall Med 34(2):169–184

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  24. Papageorghiou AT, Yu CK, Nicolaides KH (2004) The role of uterine artery Doppler in predicting adverse pregnancy outcome. Best Pract Res Clin Obstet Gynaecol 18(3):383–396

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  25. Cnossen JS, Morris RK, ter Riet G et al (2008) Use of uterine artery Doppler ultrasonography to predict pre-eclampsia and intrauterine growth restriction: a systematic review and bivariable meta-analysis. CMAJ 178(6):701–711

    Article  PubMed Central  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  26. Espinoza J, Kusanovic JP, Bahado-Singh R et al (2010) Should bilateral uterine artery notching be used in the risk assessment for preeclampsia, small-for-gestational-age, and gestational hypertension? J Ultrasound Med 29(7):1103–1115

    PubMed Central  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  27. Papageorghiou AT, Yu CK, Bindra R, Pandis G, Nicolaides KH (2001) Multicenter screening for preeclampsia and fetal growth restriction by transvaginal uterine artery Doppler at 23 weeks of gestation. Ultrasound Obstet Gynecol 18(5):441–449

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  28. Conde-Agudelo A, Villar J, Lindheimer M (2004) World Health Organization systematic review of screening tests for preeclampsia. Obstet Gynecol 104:1367–1391

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  29. Schulman H, Fleischer A, Farmakides G, Bracero L, Rochelson B, Grunfeld L (1986) Development of uterine artery compliance in pregnancy as detected by Doppler ultrasound. Am J Obstet Gynecol 155:1031–1036

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  30. Hernández-Díaz S, Toh S, Cnattingius S (2009) Risk of pre-eclampsia in first and subsequent pregnancies: prospective cohort study. BMJ 8(338):b2255

    Article  Google Scholar 

  31. Vest AR, Cho LS (2014) Hypertension in pregnancy. Curr Atheroscler Rep 16(3):395

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  32. Nelson DB, Ziadie, McIntire DD, Rogers BB, Leveno KJ (2014) Placental pathology suggesting that preeclampsia is more than one disease. J Am J Obstet Gynecol 210(1):66.e1–7

    Google Scholar 

  33. Vinnars MT, Nasiell J, Ghazi S, Westgren M, Papadogiannakis N (2011) The severity of clinical manifestations in preeclampsia correlates with the amount of placental infarction. Acta Obstet Gynecol Scand 90(1):19–25

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  34. Dietrich CF, Hirche TO, Ott M, Ignee A (2009) Real-time tissue elastography in the diagnosis of autoimmune pancreatitis. Endoscopy 41(8):718–720

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

Download references

Conflict of interest

We declare that we have no conflict of interest.

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. Department of Radiology, Marmara University Training and Research Hospital, Istanbul, Pendik, Turkey

    Canan Cimsit & Ihsan Nuri Akpinar

  2. Department of Obstetrics and Gynaecology, Marmara University Training and Research Hospital, Istanbul, Pendik, Turkey

    Tevfik Yoldemir

Authors
  1. Canan Cimsit
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  2. Tevfik Yoldemir
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  3. Ihsan Nuri Akpinar
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Canan Cimsit.

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Check for updates. Verify currency and authenticity via CrossMark

Cite this article

Cimsit, C., Yoldemir, T. & Akpinar, I.N. Strain elastography in placental dysfunction: placental elasticity differences in normal and preeclamptic pregnancies in the second trimester. Arch Gynecol Obstet 291, 811–817 (2015). https://doi.org/10.1007/s00404-014-3479-y

Download citation

  • Received:

  • Accepted:

  • Published:

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s00404-014-3479-y

Keywords

Search

Navigation