Skip to main content
SpringerLink
Log in

Non-obstetric Complications in Pregnancy: Role of Imaging

  • Chapter
  • First Online:
Breast & Gynecological Diseases

  • 1102 Accesses

Abstract

Imaging evaluation of the pregnant patient for non-obstetrical symptoms or complication is challenging. Radiographic imaging has to be considered keeping in mind the effects of radiation on the developing fetus. A lack of understanding of the true risks to the fetus resulting from exposure to ionizing radiation by the managing clinician and the radiologist can be harmful to the pregnant patient and may result in delay in appropriate imaging for conditions affecting the pregnant woman. This is compounded by the fear of exposure to radiation by the patient and her family. A detailed description of the true risk of radiation exposure is presented. The current guidelines by the professional societies for appropriate use of imaging to evaluate symptoms and clinical findings in pregnant patients is discussed. The most common indication for imaging in pregnancy is abdominal and pelvic pain, other indications include investigation of an abdominal or pelvic mass, imaging of trauma, and renal colic. Appropriate and timely imaging is critical to avoid resultant morbidity and mortality of the pregnant woman as well as the fetus. Surgical intervention is associated with an increased risk of premature labor. Accurate diagnosis is important therefore to avoid unnecessary surgical intervention to safeguard the health of both the mother and the developing fetus. Diagnostic radiological examinations are generally safe to be performed during pregnancy, but careful consideration has to be given so as to tailor the examination to the clinical symptoms and to utilize nonradiological examinations such as ultrasound as the initial imaging technique. When radiological modalities are utilized, the exposure of the gravid abdomen to ionizing radiation has to be kept as low as reasonably possible. Informed consent prior to such imaging studies is important so that the patient understands the risks and benefit of undergoing radiological investigations.

  • Radiation risk considerations from use of diagnostic imaging in pregnancy

  • Imaging in the evaluation of non-obstetrical complications in pregnancy

    • Pelvic mass

    • Abdominal pain

    • Renal colic

    • Trauma

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

Access this chapter

Log in via an institution
Chapter
USD 29.95
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Available as PDF
  • Read on any device
  • Instant download
  • Own it forever
eBook
USD 129.00
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Available as EPUB and PDF
  • Read on any device
  • Instant download
  • Own it forever
Softcover Book
USD 169.99
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Compact, lightweight edition
  • Dispatched in 3 to 5 business days
  • Free shipping worldwide - see info
Hardcover Book
USD 249.99
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Durable hardcover edition
  • Dispatched in 3 to 5 business days
  • Free shipping worldwide - see info

Tax calculation will be finalised at checkout

Purchases are for personal use only

Institutional subscriptions

Similar content being viewed by others

References

  1. American College of Obstetricians and Gynecologists. Guidelines for diagnostic imaging during pregnancy and lactation. Committee Opinion No. 723. Obstet Gynecol. 2017;130:e210–6.

    Google Scholar 

  2. ACR practice guideline for imaging pregnant or potentially pregnant adolescents and women with ionizing radiation. ACR practice guideline for continuing medical education. Practice guidelines and medical standards. Reston, VA: American College of Radiology; 23–37, 2008.

    Google Scholar 

  3. Tirada N, Dreizin D, Khati NJ, Akin EA, Zeman RK. Imaging pregnant and lactating patients. Radiographics. 2015;35(6):1751–65.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  4. Lee CI, Haims AH, Monico EP, Brink JA, Forman HP. Diagnostic CT scans: assessment of patient, physician, and radiologist awareness of radiation dose and possible risks. Radiology. 2004;231(2):393–8.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  5. Brent RL. Saving lives and changing family histories: appropriate counseling of pregnant women and men and women of reproductive age, concerning the risk of diagnostic radiation exposures during and before pregnancy. Am J Obstet Gynecol. 2009;200(1):4–24.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  6. Brent RL. Utilization of developmental basic science principles in the evaluation of reproductive risks from pre- and post-conception environmental radiation exposures. Teratology. 1999;59:182–20.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  7. Hujoel HP, Bollen A, Noonan CJ, del Aguila MA. Antepartum dental radiography and infant low birth weight. J Am Med Assoc. 2004;291:1987–93.

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  8. Brent RL. Comments on Hujoel et al. Antepartum dental radiography and infant low birth weight. Health Phys. 2005;88:379–81.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  9. Lilienfeld AM. Epidemiological studies of the leukemogenic effects of radiation. Yale J Biol Med. 1966;39:143–64.

    CAS  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  10. Preston DL, Cullings H, Suyama A, et al. Solid cancer incidence in atomic bomb survivors exposed in utero or as young children. J Natl Cancer Inst. 2008;100:428–36.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  11. Shetty MK. Abdominal computed tomography during pregnancy: a review of indications and fetal radiation exposure issues. Semin Ultrasound CT MR. 2010;31:3–7.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  12. Shetty MK, Garrett NM, Carpenter WS, Shah YP, Roberts C. Abdominal computed tomography during pregnancy for suspected appendicitis: a 5-year experience at a maternity hospital. Semin Ultrasound CT MR. 2010;31(1):8–13.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  13. El-Khoury GY, Madsen MY, Meghan EB, Yankowitz J. A new pregnancy policy for a new era. Am J Roentgenol. 2003;181:335–40.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  14. Shetty MK, Lamki NL. Imaging of pelvic masses during pregnancy. J Women Imaging. 2001;3:63–8.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  15. Kanal E, Borgstede JP, Barkovich AJ, et al. American College of Radiology white paper on MR safety: 2004 update and revisions. Am J Roentgenol. 2004;182(5):1111–4.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  16. Aguilera F, Gilchrist BF, Farkas DT. Accuracy of MRI in diagnosing appendicitis during pregnancy. Am Surg. 2018;84(8):1326–8.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  17. Ray JG, Vermeulen MJ, Bharatha A, Montanera WJ, Park AL. Association between MRI exposure during pregnancy and fetal and childhood outcomes. JAMA. 2016;316(9):952–61.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  18. Mafalda G, Matias A, Macedo F. Risks to the fetus from diagnostic imaging during pregnancy: review and proposal of a clinical protocol. Pediatr Radiol. 2015;45(13):1916–29.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  19. Patel S. Imaging the pregnant patient for nonobstetric conditions: algorithms and radiation dose considerations. Radiograpics. 2007;27(6):1705–22.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  20. Adeniran AS, Ocheke AN, Nwachukwu D, et al. Non-obstetric causes of severe maternal complications: a secondary analysis of the Nigeria Near-miss and Maternal Death Survey. BJOG. 2019;126(Suppl 3):41–8.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  21. Chen MM, Coakley FV, Kaimal A, Laros RKJ. Guidelines for computed tomography and magnetic resonance imaging use during pregnancy and lactation. Obstet Gynecol. 2008;112(2 Pt 1):333–40.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  22. Horowitz S. Management of adnexal masses in pregnancy. Clin Obstet Gynecol. 2011;54(4):519–27.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  23. Vujic J, Marsoner K, Lipp-Pump AH, et al. Non-obstetric surgery during pregnancy – an eleven-year retrospective analysis. BMC Pregnancy Childbirth. 2019;19:382.

    Google Scholar 

  24. Siew-Fei N, Cheung VYT, Pun T-C. Surgical management of adnexal masses in pregnancy. J Soc Laparoendosc Surg. 2014;18(1):71–5.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  25. Hill LM, Connors-Beatty DJ, Nowak A, et al. The role of ultrasonography in the detection and management of adnexal masses during the second and third trimesters of pregnancy. Am J Obstet Gynecol. 1998;179:703–7.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  26. Bernhard LM, Klebba PK, Gray DL, et al. Predictors of persistence of adnexal masses in pregnancy. Obstet Gynecol. 1999;93:585–9.

    CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  27. Smith LH, Dalrymple JL, Leiserowitz GS, et al. Obstetrical deliveries associated with maternal malignancy in California, 1992 through 1997. Am J Obstet Gynecol. 2001;184:1504.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  28. Telischak NA, Yeh BM, Joe BN, Westphalen AC, Poder L, Coakley FV. MRI of adnexal masses in pregnancy. AJR Am J Roentgenol. 2008;191(2):364–70.

    Article  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  29. Shetty MK. Adnexal masses: role of supplemental imaging with magnetic resonance imaging. Semin Ultrasound CT MR. 2015;36(4):369–84.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  30. Thomassin-Naggara E, Rockall AA, et al. Adnexal masses: development and preliminary validation of an MR imaging scoring system. Radiology. 2013;267(2):432–43.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  31. Ruiz M, Labauge P, Louboutin A, Limot O, Fauconnier A, Huchon C. External validation of the MR imaging scoring system for the management of adnexal masses. Eur J Obstet Gynecol Reprod Biol. 2016;205:115–9.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  32. Pereira PN, Sarian LO, Yoshida A, et al. Accuracy of the ADNEX MR scoring system based on a simplified MRI protocol for the assessment of adnexal masses. Diagn Interv Radiol. 2018;24(2):63–71.

    PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  33. Sasaguri K, Yamaguchi K, Nakazono T, et al. External validation of ADNEX MR SCORING system: a single-centre retrospective study. Clin Radiol. 2019;74(2):131–9.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  34. Thomassin-Naggara I, Fedida B, Sadowski E, et al. Complex US adnexal masses during pregnancy: Is pelvic MR imaging accurate for characterization? Eur J Radiol. 2017;93:200–8.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  35. Albright CM, Wenstrom KD. Malignancies in pregnancy. Best Pract Res Clin Obstet Gynaecol. 2016;33:2–18.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  36. Ji YI, Kim KT. Gynecologic malignancy in pregnancy. Obstet Gynecol Sci. 2013;56(5):289–300. https://doi.org/10.5468/ogs.2013.56.5.289.

    Article  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  37. Morice P, Uzan C, Gouy S, Verschraegen C, Haie-Meder C. Gynaecological cancers in pregnancy. Lancet. 2012;379(9815):558–69.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  38. Fruscio R, de Haan J, Van Calsteren K, Verheecke M, Mhallem M, Amant F. Ovarian cancer in pregnancy. Best Pract Res Clin Obstet Gynaecol. 2017;41:108–17.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  39. Dotters-Katz S, McNeil M, Limmer J, Kuller J. Cancer and pregnancy: the clinician's perspective. Obstet Gynecol Surv. 2014;69(5):277–86.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  40. Saghafi N, Roodsary ZY, Kadkhodaeian S, Mofrad MH, Farahabadi EH, Hoseinyfarahabady M. Comparison of adnexal mass in women undergoing mass excision during the antepartum period and cesarean section. Oman Med J. 2016;31(3):217–22.

    Article  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  41. Mervak BM, Altun E, McGinty KA, Hyslop WB, Semelka RC, Burke LM. MRI in pregnancy: indications and practical considerations. J Magn Reson Imaging. 2019;49(3):621–31.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  42. Sirvanci M, Balci NC, Karaman K, Duran C, Karakaş E. Primary epiploic appendagitis: MRI findings. Magn Reson Imaging. 2002;20(1):137–9.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  43. Bassi A, Czuzoj-Shulman N, Abenhaim HA. Effect of pregnancy on the management and outcomes of ovarian torsion: a population-based matched cohort study. J Minim Invasive Gynecol. 2018;25(7):1260–5.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  44. Riley JM, Dudley AG, Semins MJ. Nephrolithiasis and pregnancy: has the incidence been rising? J Endourol. 2014;28:383.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  45. Stothers L, Lee LM. Renal colic in pregnancy. J Urol. 1992;148:1383.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  46. Reinstatler L, Khaleel S, Pais VMJ. Association of pregnancy with stone formation among Butler EL, Cox SM, Eberts EG, Cunningham FG. Symptomatic nephrolithiasis complicating pregnancy. Obstet Gynecol. 2000;96:753.

    Google Scholar 

  47. Reinstatler L, Khaleel S, Pais VMJ. Association of pregnancy with stone formation among women in the United States: A NHANES analysis 2007 to 2012. J Urol. 2017;198(2):389–93.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  48. Denstedt JD, Razvi H. Management of urinary calculi during pregnancy. J Urol. 1992;148(3 Pt 2):1072–4.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  49. Srirangam SJ, Hickerton B, Van Cleynenbreugel B. Management of urinary calculi in pregnancy: a review. J Endourol. 2008;22:867–75.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  50. Gorton E, Whitfield HN. Renal calculi in pregnancy. Br J Urol. 1997;80(suppl 1):4–9.

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  51. Swartz MA, Lydon-Rochelle MT, Simon D, Wright JL, Porter MP. Admission for nephrolithiasis in pregnancy and risk of adverse birth outcomes. Obstet Gynecol. 2007;109:1099–104.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  52. Evans HJ, Wollin TA. The management of urinary calculi in pregnancy. Curr Opin Urol. 2001;11:379–84.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  53. Biyani CS, Joyce AD. Urolithiasis in pregnancy. I. Pathophysiology, fetal considerations and diagnosis. BJU Int. 2002;89:811–8.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  54. Parulkar BG, Hopkins TB, Wollin MR, Howard PJ, Lal A. Renal colic during pregnancy: a case for conservative treatment. J Urol. 1998;159:365–8.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  55. Shokeir AA, Mahran MR, Abdulmaaboud M. Renal colic in pregnant women: role of renal resistive index. Urology. 2000;55:344–7.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  56. Hertzberg BS, Carroll BA, Bowie JD, et al. Doppler US assessment of maternal kidneys: analysis of intrarenal resistivity indexes in normal pregnancy and physiologic pelvicaliectasis. Radiology. 1993;186:689–92.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  57. Wachsberg RH. Unilateral absence of ureteral jets in the third trimester of pregnancy: pitfall in color Doppler US diagnosis of urinary obstruction. Radiology. 1998;209:279–81.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  58. Deyoe LA, Cronan JJ, Breslaw BH, Ridlen MS. New techniques of ultrasound and color Doppler in the prospective evaluation of acute renal obstruction: do they replace the intravenous urogram? Abdom Imaging. 1995;20:58–63.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  59. Laing FC, Benson CB, DiSalvo DN, Brown DL, Frates MC, Loughlin KR. Distal ureteral calculi: detection with vaginal US. Radiology. 1994;192(2):545–8.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  60. MacNeily AE, Goldenberg SL, Allen GJ, Ajzen SA, Cooperberg PL. Sonographic visualization of the ureter in pregnancy. J Urol. 1991;146(2):298–301.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  61. Farkash E, et al. Acute antepartum pyelonephritis in pregnancy: a critical analysis of risk factors and outcomes. Eur J Obstet Gynecol Reprod Biol. 2012;162(1):24–7.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  62. Seidman DS, et al. Role of renal ultrasonography in the management of pyelonephritis in pregnant women. J Perinatol Off J Calif Perinat Assoc. 1998;18(2):98–101.

    CAS  Google Scholar 

  63. Roy C, Saussine C, LeBras Y, et al. Assessment of painful ureterohydronephrosis during pregnancy by MR urography. Eur Radiol. 1996;6:334–8.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  64. Spencer JA, Chahal R, Kelly A, Taylor K, Eardley I, Lloyd SN. Evaluation of painful hydronephrosis in pregnancy: magnetic resonance urographic patterns in physiological dilatation versus calculous obstruction. J Urol. 2004;171:256–60.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  65. Hurwitz LM, Yoshizumi T, Reiman RE, et al. Radiation dose to the fetus from body MDCT during early gestation. AJR Am J Roentgenol. 2006;186:871–6.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  66. Katz DS, Venkataramanan N, Napel S, Sommer FG. Can low-dose unenhanced multidetector CT be used for routine evaluation of suspected renal colic? AJR Am J Roentgenol. 2003;180:313–5.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  67. Mattox KL, Goetzl L. Trauma in pregnancy. Crit Care Med. 2005;33(suppl 10):S385–9.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  68. Towery R, English TP, Wisner D. Evaluation of pregnant women after blunt injury. J Trauma. 1993;35(5):731–5.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  69. Connolly AM, Katz VL, Bash KL, McMahon MJ, Hansen WF. Trauma and pregnancy. Am J Perinatol. 1997;14(6):331–6.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  70. Shah KH, Simons RK, Holbrook T, Fortlage D, Winchell RJ, Hoyt DB. Trauma in pregnancy: maternal and feta outcomes. J Trauma. 1998;45:83–6.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  71. Rogers FB, Rozycki GS, Osler TM, et al. A multiinstitutional study of factors associated with fetal death in injured pregnant patients. Arch Surg. 1999;134:1274–7.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  72. Weiss HB, Songer TJ, Fabio A. Fetal deaths related to maternal injury. JAMA. 2001;286:1863–8.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  73. Theodorou DA, Velmahos GC, Souter I, et al. Fetal death after trauma in pregnancy. Am Surg. 2000;66:809–12.

    CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  74. Sandy EA 2nd, Koerner M. Self-inflicted gunshot wound to the pregnant abdomen: report of a case and review of the literature. Am J Perinatol. 1989;6:30–1.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  75. Petrone P, Talving P, Browder T, et al. Abdominal injuries in pregnancy: a 155-month study at two level 1 trauma centers. Injury. 2011;42:47–9.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  76. National Council on Radiation Protection and Measurements. Medical radiation exposure of pregnant and potentially pregnant women. NCRP report no 54. Bethesda, MD: National Council on Radiation Protection and Measurements; 1977.

    Google Scholar 

  77. American College of Radiology and the Society for Pediatric Radiology. ACR-SPR practice guideline for imaging pregnant or potentially pregnant adolescents and women with ionizing radiation. http://www.acr.org/~/media/9e2ed55531fc4b4fa53ef3b6d3b25df8.pdf. Published 2013. Accessed 16 Jan 2013.

  78. American College of Obstetrics and Gynecology Committee on Obstetric Practice. ACOG committee opinion: guidelines for diagnostic imaging during pregnancy. Obstet Gynecol. 2004;104(3):647–51.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  79. Expert Panel on Major Trauma Imaging, Shyu JY, Khurana B, Soto JA, Biffl WL, Camacho MA, Diercks DB, Glanc P, Kalva SP, Khosa F, Meyer BJ, Ptak T, Raja AS, Salim A, West OC, Lockhart ME. ACR Appropriateness Criteria® major blunt trauma. J Am Coll Radiol. 2020;17(5S):S160–74.

    Google Scholar 

  80. Rose JS. Ultrasound in abdominal trauma. Emerg Med Clin North Am. 2004;22(3):581–99.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  81. Grossman NB. Blunt trauma in pregnancy. Am Fam Physician. 2004;70:1303–10.

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  82. Feldstein VA, Harris RD, Machin GA. Ultrasound of the placenta and umbilical cord. In: Callen PW, editor. Ultrasonography in obstetrics and gynecology. 4th ed. Philadelphia, PA: Saunders; 2000. p. 597–625.

    Google Scholar 

  83. Glantz C, Purnell L. Clinical utility of sonography in the diagnosis and treatment of placental abruption. J Ultrasound Med. 2002;21:837–40.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  84. Richards JR, Ormsby EL, Romo MV, Gillen MA, McGahan JP. Blunt abdominal injury in the pregnant patient: detection with US. Radiology. 2004;233(2):463–70.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  85. Goodwin H, Holmes JF, Wisner DH. Abdominal ultrasound examination in pregnant blunt trauma patients. J Trauma. 2001;50(4):689–93; discussion 694.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  86. Brown MA, Sirlin CB, Farahmand N, Hoyt DB, Casola G. Screening sonography in pregnant patients with blunt abdominal trauma. J Ultrasound Med. 2005;24(2):175–81; quiz 183–184.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  87. Cohan RC, Cohen M, Davenport M, et al. ACR manual on contrast media. American College of Radiology Website. xray.ufl.edu/files/2008/06/Full Manual ACRContrastVersion7.pdf. Accessed 17 July 2012.

  88. Pearlman MD, Tintinalli JE, Lorenz RP. Blunt trauma during pregnancy. N Engl J Med. 1990;323:1609–13.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  89. Pearlman MD, Klinich KD, Schneider LW, Rupp J, Moss S, Ashton-Miller J. A comprehensive program to improve safety for pregnant women and fetuses in motor vehicle crashes: a preliminary report. Am J Obstet Gynecol. 2000;182:1554–64.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  90. Wei SH, Helmy M, Cohen AJ. CT evaluation of placental abruption in pregnant trauma patients. Emerg Radiol. 2009;16(5):365–73.

    Article  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  91. Manriquez M, Srinivas G, Bollepalli S, Britt L, Drachman D. Is computed tomography a reliable diagnostic modality in detecting placental injuries in the setting of acute trauma? Am J Obstet Gynecol. 2010;202(6)

    Google Scholar 

  92. El-Kady D, Gilbert WM, Anderson J, Danielsen B, Towner D, Smith LH. Trauma during pregnancy: an analysis of maternal and fetal outcomes in a large population. Am J Obstet Gynecol. 2004;190(6):1661–8.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  93. Masselli G, Brunelli R, Di Tola M, Anceschi M, Gualdi G. MR imaging in the evaluation of placental abruption: correlation with sonographic findings. Radiology. 2011;259(1):222–30.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

Suggested Reading

  • Brown HL. Trauma in pregnancy. Obstet Gynecol. 2009;114(1):147–60.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Cohen-Kerem R, Nulman I, Abramow-Newerly M, et al. Diagnostic radiation in pregnancy: perception versus true risks. J Obstet Gynaecol Can. 2006;28(1):43–8.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Dash N, Lupetin AR. Uterine rupture secondary to trauma: CT findings. J Comput Assist Tomogr. 1991;15(2):329–31.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • McCormick A, Peterson E. Cancer in pregnancy. Obstet Gynecol Clin N Am. 2018;45(2):187–200.

    Article  Google Scholar 

Download references

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. Baylor College of Medicine, Houston, TX, USA

    Mahesh K. Shetty

  2. Digestive Health Institute, GI & GYN Radiology, Abdominal Imaging, Department of Radiology, Case Western Reserve University, Cleveland, OH, USA

    Raj Mohan Paspulati

Authors
  1. Mahesh K. Shetty
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  2. Raj Mohan Paspulati
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Mahesh K. Shetty .

Editor information

Editors and Affiliations

  1. Baylor College of Medicine, Houston, TX, USA

    Mahesh K. Shetty

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

Copyright information

© 2021 Springer Nature Switzerland AG

About this chapter

Check for updates. Verify currency and authenticity via CrossMark

Cite this chapter

Shetty, M.K., Paspulati, R.M. (2021). Non-obstetric Complications in Pregnancy: Role of Imaging. In: Shetty, M.K. (eds) Breast & Gynecological Diseases. Springer, Cham. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-030-69476-0_10

Download citation

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-030-69476-0_10

  • Published:

  • Publisher Name: Springer, Cham

  • Print ISBN: 978-3-030-69475-3

  • Online ISBN: 978-3-030-69476-0

  • eBook Packages: MedicineMedicine (R0)

Publish with us

Policies and ethics

Search

Navigation