Assessment of the Cervix Using Strain Elastography in Pregnant Women with Spontaneous Preterm Birth

doi:10.37015/AUDT.2018.180807

Abstract

Abstract:

Objective: Preterm birth is still the leading cause of neonatal mortality. How to identify women who are at a higher risk of preterm birth continues to be one of the main problems in obstetrics. The aim of this study was to estimate the potential value of cervical strain in predicting the risk of preterm birth.
Methods: A total of 152 pregnant women who received prenatal examination in Beijing Obstetrics and Gynecology Hospital during January 2017 and October 2017. On the basis of the clinical diagnostic criteria for preterm birth, all of pregnant women were divided into two groups: There are 50 patients with the diagnosis of threatened premature or preterm labor in the study group and 102 patients without diagnosis of threatened premature or preterm labor in the control group. Measure cervical length by transvaginal ultrasound and obtain three cervical elasticity indexes by strain elastography: Closed internal cervical os strain rate, external cervical os strain rate and midpoint of the cervical canal strain rate. In the study group the pregnant women were divided into three teams: Length of cervix is 2 cm or less (10 cases) for T1, 2 to 3 cm (21 cases) for T2 and 3 cm or more (19 cases) for T3. Independent sample t-test was used to analyze the difference between the two groups. LSD-t test was used in the two groups. The receiver operating characteristic curve was used to analysis these four indicators. Statistical significance was defined as a p value < 0.05.
Results: Cervical length (CL) was lower and cervical os strain rate (CIS) was higher in the study group (2.67 ± 0.76 vs. 3.85 ± 0.65, p < 0.05; 0.53 ± 0.35 vs. 0.27 ± 0.24, p < 0.05). There was a significant difference with CIS in different cervical length team (p = 0.017) and the mean value of CIS in T1 was higher than the last two teams. The cutoff value of CL maximizing the accuracy of diagnosis was 3.2 cm; area under the curves (AUC), sensitivity, specificity, accuracy, positive predictive value (PPV) and negative predictive value (NPV) were 0.877, 73.3%, 87.0%, 82.2%, 73.5%, 86.4% respectively. Combining CL and CIS, the results of AUC, sensitivity, specificity, accuracy, PPV and NPV (0.891, 73.3%, 91.3%, 84.9%, 80.0%, 86.9%) increased in predicting the risk of spontaneous preterm birth, and the cutoff values of the CL and CIS were 3.1 cm and 0.35%.
Conclusion: The shortening of CL and the increasing CIS are closely related to the occurrence of premature birth and can be used as the indexes to predict the preterm labor. CIS can be used as an indicator to monitor early preterm changes. The combination of CL and CIS may have a role in assessing the risk of spontaneous preterm birth.

Key words: Cervix; Length; Strain elastography; Spontaneous preterm birth

Jinghua Li, MD, Yuanyuan An, MD, Lina Zhang, MD, Yinghua Xuan, MD, Qingqing Wu, MD. Assessment of the Cervix Using Strain Elastography in Pregnant Women with Spontaneous Preterm Birth. Advanced Ultrasound in Diagnosis and Therapy, 2018, 2(2): 106-112.

References

[1]	Liu L, Oza S, Hogan D, Yue C, Jamie P, Jun Z, et al. Global, regional, national causes of under-5 mortality in 2000-15: an updated systematic analysis with implications for the Sustainable Development Goals. Lancet 2016; 388:3027-35.
[2]	Blencowe H, Cousens S, Oestergaard M, Chou D, Moller AB, Narwal R, et al. National, regional and worldwide estimates of preterm birth. Lancet 2012; 379:2162-72.
[3]	Ananth CV, Vintzileos AM. Epidemiology of preterm birth and its clinical subtypes. Matern Fetal Neonatal Med 2006; 19:773-82.
[4]	Zou L, Wang X, Xin, Ruan Y, Li G, Chen Y, Zhang W. Preterm Birth and neonatal mortality in China 2011. Intel J of Gyn & Obst 2014; 127:243-7.
[5]	Vink J, Feltovich H. Cervical etiology of spontaneous preterm birth. Semin Fetal Neonatal Med 2016; 21:106-112.
[6]	Arrigo F, Edoardo M, Helen F, Ralf S. Cervical elastography during pregnancy: a critical review of current approaches with a focus on controversies and limitations. J Med Ultrasonics 2016; 43:493-504.
[7]	Lim K, Butt K, Crane JM. SOGC Clinical Practice Guideline. Ultrasonographic cervical length assessment in predicting preterm birth in singleton pregnancies. J Obstet Gynecol 2011; 3:486-99.
[8]	ACOG. Practice Bulletin No. 130: prediction and prevention on preterm birth. Obstet Gynecol 2012; 120:964-73.
[9]	Yankova Y, Nikolov A, Nashar. Bishop score and outcome of labor in pregnancy < or = 32 weeks of gestation. Akusherstvo i Ginekologiia 2012; 51:3-8.
[10]	Kagan K, Sonek J. How to measure cervical length. Ultrasound Obstet Gynecol 2015; 45:358-62.
[11]	Kolkman D, Verhoeven C, Brinkhorst S. The Bishop Score as a Predictor of Labor Induction Success: A Systematic Review. Am J Perinatol 2013; 30:625-30.
[12]	Tsuyoshi S, Kathryn R, Mark L, Timothy J, Jeffrey C, Bamber P, et al. WFUMB Guidelines and Recommendations for Clinical Use of Ultrasound Elastography: Part 1: Basic Principles and Terminology. Ultrasound in Medicine and Biology 2015; 41:1126-47.
[13]	Medley N, Poljak B, Mammarella S, Alfirevic Z. Clinical guidelines for prevention and management of preterm birth: a systematic review. BJOG 2018; .
[14]	To M, Skentou C, Cicero Sl. Cervical assessment at the routine 23- weeks’ scan: problems with trans-abdominal sonography. Ultrasound Obstet Gynecol 2000; 15:292-6.
[15]	American College of Obstetricians and Gynecologists. ncidentally detected short cervical length. Committee Opinion No.522. Obstet Gynecol 2012; 119:879-82.
[16]	Saccone G, Simonetti B, Berghella V. Transvaginal ultrasound cervical length for prediction of spontaneous labour at term: a systematic review and meta-analysis. BJOG 2016; 123:16-22.
[17]	Esmat J, Atoosa A, Mehri S. Reference range of the weekly uterine cervical length at 8 to 38 weeks of gestation in the center of Iran. Adv Biomed Res 2015; 4:115-21.
[18]	Sotiriadis A, Papatheodorou S, Kavvadias A, Makrydimas G. Cervical length measurement for prediction of preterm birth in women with threatened preterm labor: a meta-analysis. Ultrasound Obstet Gynecol 2010; 35:54-64.
[19]	Papastefanou I, Pilalis A, Kappou D, Athena P. Cervical length at 11-40 weeks: unconditional and conditional longitudinal reference ranges. Acta Obstet Gynecol Scand 2016; 95:1376-82.
[20]	Crosby D, Miletin J, Semberova J, Daly S. Is routine transvaginal cervical length measurement cost-effective in a population where the risk of spontaneous preterm birth is low? Acta Obstet Gynecol Scand 2016; 95:1391-5.
[21]	Facchinetti F, Venturini P, Blasi I, Giannella L. Changes in the cervical competence in preterm labour. BJOG 2005; 112:23-7.
[22]	Read C, Word R, Ruscheinsky M, Brenda C, Mala S. Cervical remodeling during pregnancy and parturition: molecular characterization of the softening phase in mice. Reproduction 2007; 134:327-40.
[23]	Akins M, Luby-Phelps K, Bank R, Mala M. Cervical softening during pregnancy: regulated changes in collagen cross-linking and composition of matricellular proteins in the mouse. Biol Reprod 2011; 84:1053-62.
[24]	Hernandez-Andrade E, Hassan SS, Ahn H, Korzeniewski SJ, Yeo L, Chaiworapongsa T, et al. Evaluation of cervical stiffness during pregnancy using semiquantitative ultrasound elastography. Ultrasound Obstet Gyneco 2013; 41:152-61.
[25]	Newman R, Goldenberg R, Iams J, MacPherson C, Goldenberg R, Mueller-Heubach E, et al. Preterm Prediction Study: Comparison of the Cervical Score and Bishop Score for Prediction of Spontaneous Preterm Delivery. Obstet Gynecol 2008; 112:508-15.
[26]	Leitich H, Brunbauer M, Kaider A, Egarter C, Husslein P. Cervical length and dilatation of the internal cervical os detected by vaginal ultrasonography as markers for preterm delivery: A systematic review. Am J Obstet Gynecol 1999; 181:1465-72.
[27]	Benham B, Balducci J, Atlas RO, Orion A. Risk factors for preterm delivery in patients demonstrating sonographic evidence of premature dilation of the internal os, prolapse of the membranes in the endocervical canal and shortening of the distal cervical segment by second trimester ultrasound. J Obstet Gynaecol 2002; 42:46-50.
[28]	Hernandez-Andrade E, Garcia M, Ahn H, Steven J, Homam S, Lami Yeo, et al. Strain at the internal cervical os assessed with quasi-static elastography is associated with the risk of spontaneous preterm delivery at ≤34 weeks of gestation. J Perinat Med 2015; 43 : 657-66.
[29]	Pereira S, Frick AP, Poon LC, Zamprakou A, Nicolaides K. Successful induction of labor: prediction by preinduction cervical length, angle of progression and cervical elastography. Ultrasound Obstet Gynecol 2014; 44:468-75.
[30]	Hernandez-Andrade E, Romero R, Korzeniewski S, Hyunyoung A, Alma A, Maynor G, et al. Cervical strain determined by ultrasound elastography and its association with spontaneous preterm delivery. J Perinat Med 2014; 42:159-69.
[31]	Wozniak S, Czuczwar P, Szkodziak P, Milart P, Wozniakowska E, Paszkowski T. Elastography in predicting preterm delivery in asymptomatic, low-risk women: a prospective observational study. BMC Pregnancy Childbirth 2014; 14:238-46.
[32]	Winkler M, Rath W. Changes in the cervical extracellular matrix during pregnancy and parturition. J Perinat Med 1999; 27:45-60.
[33]	Uldbjerg N, Ekman G, Malmstrom A. Ripening of the human uterine cervix related to changes in collagen, glycosaminoglycans, and collagenolytic activity. Am J Obstet Gynecol 1983; 147:662-6.
[34]	Osmers R, Rath W, Pflanz MA. Glycosaminoglycans in cervical connective tissue during pregnancy and parturition. Obstet Gynecol 1993; 81:88-92.
[35]	Yamaguchi M, Fukami T, Asakura H, Toshiyuki T. Predicting onset of labor from echogenicity of the cervical gland area on vaginal ultrasonography at term. J Perinat Med 2015; 43:577-84.