正常中晚孕胎盘弹性模量评价及影响因素初探

doi:10.12117/jccmi.2019.10.010

Abstract
Figure/Table
References (23)
Related Citation (15)

Download: PDF (0 KB) HTML (1 KB)
Export: BibTeX | EndNote (RIS)

Abstract Objective: To explore the factors that affect evaluation of normal placental elasticity by shear wave elastography(SWE) technology. Methods: Sixty-nine normal single pregnant women in the second or third trimester were enrolled in the study. The hemodynamic parameters(S/D, PI, RI) of bilateral uterine artery and umbilical artery were routinely measured by ultrasound. The elastic modulus of placenta from the central-fetal surface, central-maternal surface, peripheral-fetal surface and peripheral-maternal surface were measured by SWE technology. The 5-minute Apgar score were gained after birth. The relationship of elastic modulus and sampling areas, gestational weeks and the above hemodynamic parameters was evaluated. Results: The central-fetal surface, the central-maternal surface, the peripheral-fetal surface and the peripheral-maternal surface of normal pregnancy placental elastic modulus in the second or third trimester were (5.85±1.68) kPa, (6.20±1.29) kPa, (5.88±1.30) kPa, (6.24±1.23) kPa, respectively. There was no statistical difference of elastic modulus among the four different areas of the placenta(P>0.05). The placental elastic modulus in the second trimester and the third trimester were (5.79±0.67) kPa and (6.17±0.88) kPa, respectively. There was no significant difference of elastic modulus between the second and third trimester. There was no obvious correlation between placental elastic modulus and hemodynamic parameters of bilateral uterine artery and umbilical artery(P>0.05). Conclusion: The normal placental elastic modulus value in the second or third trimester is (6.04±0.83) kPa, which is not significantly correlated with the sampling area, the gestational week and hemodynamic parameters. SWE technology can reliably obtain the elastic biomechanical information of placental tissue, which is helpful for more comprehensive assessment of placental function.

Key words： Placenta Ultrasonography, prenatal

Received: 16 October 2018

PACS:	Ｒ714.56
	Ｒ445.1

	Service

	E-mail this article
	Add to my bookshelf
	Add to citation manager
	E-mail Alert
	RSS
	Articles by authors
	GE Cheng-xia
	GUO Jian-feng

Cite this article:

GE Cheng-xia,GUO Jian-feng. Evaluation of the placental elastic modulus in the normal second or third trimester of pregnancy and its influencing factors[J]. JOURNAL OF CHINA MEDICAL IMAGING, 2019, 30(10): 726-729.

URL:

http://www.jccmi.com.cn/EN/10.12117/jccmi.2019.10.010 OR http://www.jccmi.com.cn/EN/Y2019/V30/I10/726

[1]Fadl S, Moshiri M, Fligner C L, et al. Placental Imaging: Normal Appearance with Review of Pathologic Findings[J]. Radiographics, 2017, 37(3): 979-998.
[2]赵静，邓学东. 不良妊娠结局胎盘影像学评价及病理研究进展[J]. 中华医学超声杂志：电子版，2018，15（2）：101-106.
[3]Xue Y, Yao S, Li X, et al. Value of shear wave elastography in discriminating malignant and benign breast lesions: A meta-analysis[J]. Medicine, 2017, 96(42): e7412.
[4]Liu Z, Jing H, Han X, et al. Shear wave elastography combined with the thyroid imaging reporting and data system for malignancy risk stratification in thyroid nodules[J]. Oncotarget, 2017, 8(26): 43406-43416.
[5]Sidhar K, Mcgahan JP, Early HM, et al. Renal Cell Carcinomas: Sonographic Appearance Depending on Size and Histologic Type[J]. J Ultrasound Med, 2016, 35(2): 311-320.
[6]李俊来，李昶田，薛小伟. 乳腺弹性成像原理及质量控制[J]. 中国超声医学杂志，2017，33（7）：667-670.
[7]Rms S, Liau J, Kaffas AE, et al. Ultrasound Elastography: Review of Techniques and Clinical Applications[J]. Theranostics, 2017, 7(5): 1303-1329.
[8]谢幸，苟文丽. 妇产科学. 8版[M]. 北京：人民卫生出版社，2013：64-66.
[9]Roescher AM, Timmer A, Erwich JJ, et al. Placental Pathology, Perinatal Death, Neonatal Outcome, and Neurological Development: A Systematic Review[J]. PLoS One, 2014, 9(2): e89419.
[10]Zaidi SF, Moshiri M, Osman S, et al. Comprehensive Imaging Review of Abnormalities of the Placenta[J]. Ultrasound Q, 2016, 32(1): 25-42.
[11]Wang L. Acoustic Radiation Force Based Ultrasound Elasticity Imaging for Biomedical Applications[J]. Sensors, 2018, 18(7): 2252-2267.
[12]Li WJ, Wei ZT, Yan RL, et al. Detection of placenta elasticity modulus by quantitative real-time shear wave imaging[J]. Clin Exp Obstet Gynecol, 2012, 39(4): 470-473.
[13]Moran M, Ryan J, Higgins M, et al. Poor agreement between operators on grading of the placenta[J]. J Obstet Gynaecol, 2011, 31(1): 24-28.
[14]Wu S, Nan R, Li Y, et al. Measurement of elasticity of normal placenta using the Virtual Touch quantification technique[J]. Ultrasonography, 2016, 35(3): 253-257.
[15]袁胜美，刘艳君，王学梅，等. 实时剪切波弹性成像对妊娠期高血压疾病胎盘弹性的应用研究[J]. 中国超声医学杂志，2017，33（1）：38-41.
[16]Kilic F, Kayadibi Y, Yüksel MA, et al. Shear wave elastography of placenta: in vivo quantitation of placental elasticity in preeclampsia[J]. Diagn Interv Radiol, 2015, 21(3): 202-207.
[17]Yuksel MA, Kilic F, Kayadibi Y, et al. Shear wave elastography of the placenta in patients with gestational diabetes mellitus[J]. J Obstetr Gynaecol, 2016, 36(5): 585-588.
[18]Arioz Habibi H, Alici Davutoglu E, Kandemirli SG, et al. In vivo assessment of placental elasticity in intrauterine growth restriction by shear-wave elastography[J]. Eur J Radiol, 2017, 97: 16-20.
[19]Alici DE, Arioz HH, Ozel A, et al. The role of shear wave elastography in the assessment of placenta previa-accreta[J]. J Matern Fetal Neonatal Med, 2018, 31(12): 1660-1662.
[20]Shiina T, Nightingale KR, Palmeri ML, et al. WFUMB Guidelines and Recommendations for Clinical Use of Ultrasound Elastography: Part 1: Basic Principles and Terminology[J]. Ultrasound Med Biol, 2015, 41(5): 1126-1147.
[21]Quibel T, Deloison B, Chammings F, et al. Placental elastography in a murine intrauterine growth restriction model[J]. Prenat Diagn, 2015, 35(11): 1106-1111.
[22]Sugitani M, Fujita Y, Yumoto Y, et al. A new method for measurement of placental elasticity: acoustic radiation force impulse imaging[J]. Placenta, 2013, 34(11): 1009-1013.
[23]Issaoui M, Debost-Legrand A, Skerl K, et al. Shear wave elastography safety in fetus: A quantitative health risk assessment[J]. Diagn Interv Imaging, 2018, 99(9): 519-524.