UROGENITAL RADIOLOGY / ORIGINAL PAPER
Shear wave elastography of the uterine cervix under different conditions with inter-operator agreement analysis
 
More details
Hide details
1
Bakirkoy Dr. Sadi Konuk Training and Research Hospital, Istanbul, Turkey
 
 
Submission date: 2020-01-01
 
 
Final revision date: 2020-03-13
 
 
Acceptance date: 2020-03-19
 
 
Publication date: 2020-05-11
 
 
Pol J Radiol, 2020; 85: 245-249
 
KEYWORDS
TOPICS
ABSTRACT
Purpose:
Shear wave elastography (SWE) is a relatively new technique for measuring tissue elasticity. Its implementation for assessing the tissue of the cervix is evolving, and SWE analyses of healthy, nonpregnant cervixes is the first step in understanding other SWE changes related to cervical pathologies; nevertheless, some challenges in the use of the technique still require investigation. We aimed to target the consistency of healthy cervix shear wave elastography measurements and examine the changes induced by patient-related factors.

Material and methods:
Elastograms were obtained at the internal and external os in the anterior (IA, EA) and posterior (IP, EP) portions of the cervix using a transvaginal approach in eight postmenopausal and 25 premenopausal women. Measurements with a standard deviation of over 20% and patients who presented with colour loss or heterogeneity were excluded from the study. Shear wave elastography assessments were performed using a Toshiba Aplio 500 version 6. Statistical significance was defined as a p value less than 0.10, due to the small number of patients.

Results:
The mean speeds obtained at the external os on the anterior and posterior aspects was 3.17 ± 0.85 m/s and 3.18 ± 0.84 m/s, respectively, and at the internal os, the results on the anterior and posterior aspects were 3.38 ± 0.73 m/s and 3.53 ± 0.81 m/s, respectively. The difference in speed among all regions was statistically significant (p < 0.05). Fifteen patients were also analysed by a second radiologist with a similar experience level as that of the first. Nine measurements for IP, 13 measurements for IA, 11 measurements for EP, and 15 measurements for EA were performed. The correlation coefficients between the two sets of measurements were 0.46, 0.30, 0.67, and 0.51, respectively. There was no difference in the SWE values with respect to age, parity, and gravidity for any of the regions. The SWE values at the IA, IP, and EA regions between the postmenopausal and premenopausal women were significantly different (p = 0.038, p = 0.059, p = 0.065).

Conclusions:
The posterior portion of the internal os is most likely to undergo inaccurate SWE measurement among the different anatomical positions. The correlation between radiologists was found to be different for different locations in the cervix. More studies are needed to determine the SWE values of the healthy cervix and the agreement levels between radiologists.

REFERENCES (22)
1.
Barr RG. Real-time ultrasound elasticity of the breast. Ultrasound Q 2010; 26: 61-66.
 
2.
Bamber J, Cosgrove D, Dietrich CF, et al. EFSUMB guidelines and recommendations on the clinical use of ultrasound elastography. Part 1: basicprinciples and technology. Ultraschall Med 2013; 34: 169-184.
 
3.
Gong X, Xu Q, Xu Z, et al. Real-time elastography for the differentiation of benign and malignant breast lesions: a meta-analysis. Breast Cancer Res Treat 2011; 130: 11-18.
 
4.
Ding J, Cheng H, Ning C, et al. Quantitative measurement for thyroid cancer characterization based on elastography. J Ultrasound Med 2011; 30: 1259-1266.
 
5.
Swiatkowska-Freund M, Preis K. Elastography of the uterine cervix: implications for success of induction of labor. Ultrasound Obstet Gynecol 2011; 38: 52-56.
 
6.
Tekesin I, Wallwiener D, Schmidt S. The value of quantitative ultrasound tissue characterization of the cervix and rapid fetal fibronectin in predicting preterm delivery. J Perinat Med 2005; 33: 383-391.
 
7.
Thomas A. Imaging of the cervix using sonoelastography. Ultrasound Obstet Gynecol 2006; 28: 356-357.
 
8.
Agarwal A, Agarwal S, Chandak S. Role of acoustic radiation force impulse and shear wave velocity in prediction of preterm birth: a prospective study. Acta Radiol 2018; 59: 755-762.
 
9.
Agarwal S, Agarwal A, Joon P, Saraswat S, Chandak S. Fetal adrenal gland biometry and cervical elastography as predictors of preterm birth: a comparative study. Ultrasound 2018; 26: 54-62.
 
10.
Ono T, Katsura D, Yamada K, et al. Use of ultrasound shear-wave elastography to evaluate change in cervical stiffness during pregnancy. J Obstet Gynaecol Res 2017; 43: 1405-1410.
 
11.
Carlson LC, Romero ST, Palmeri ML, et al. Changes in shear wave speed pre-and post-induction of labor: a feasibility study. Ultrasound Obstet Gynecol 2015; 46: 93-98.
 
12.
Liu C, Li TT, Hu Z, et al. Shear wave elastography in the diagnosis of cervical disease. J Ultrasound Med 2019; 38: 3173-3181.
 
13.
Thomas A, Kümmel S, Gemeinhardt O, Fischer T. Real-time sonoelastography of the cervix: tissue elasticity of the normal and abnormal cervix. Acad Radiol 2007; 14: 193-200.
 
14.
O’Hara S, Zelesco M, Sun Z. Shear wave elastography on the uterine cervix: technical development for the transvaginal approach. J Ultrasound Med 2019; 38: 1049-1060.
 
15.
Manchanda S, Vora Z, Sharma R, et al. Quantitative sonoelastographic assessment of the normal uterus using shear wave elastography: an initial experience. J Ultrasound Med 2019; 38: 3183-3189.
 
16.
Carlson LC, Feltovich H, Palmeri ML, et al. Estimation of shear wave speed in the human uterine cervix. Ultrasound Obstet Gynecol 2014; 43: 452-458.
 
17.
Feltovich H, Carlson L. New techniques in evaluation of the cervix. Semin Perinatol 2017; 41: 477-484.
 
18.
Hernandez-Andrade E, Hassan SS, Ahn H, et al. Evaluation of cervical stiffness during pregnancy using semiquantitative ultrasound elastography. Ultrasound Obstet Gynecol 2013; 41:152-161.
 
19.
Peralta L, Molina FS, Melchor J, et al. Transient elastography to assess the cervical ripening during pregnancy: a preliminary study. Ultraschall Med 2017; 38: 395-402.
 
20.
Hernandez-Andrade E, Aurioles-Garibay A, Garcia M, Korzeniewski SJ, et al. Effect of depth on shear-wave elastography estimated in the internal and external cervical os during pregnancy. J Perinat Med 2014; 42: 549-557.
 
21.
Fruscalzo A, Steinhard J, Londero AP, et al. Reliability of quantitative elastographyof the uterine cervix in at-term pregnancies. J Perinat Med 2013; 41: 421-427.
 
22.
Molina F, Gomez L, Florido J, et al. Quantificationof cervical elastography. A reproducibility study. Ultrasound Obstet Gynecol 2012; 39: 685-689.
 
Journals System - logo
Scroll to top