One hundred and seventy-four cases were included in this study. The baseline information of PAS patients was demonstrated in Table 1. 81 of 174 patients were diagnosed of PAS intraoperatively (accreta, n = 33; increta, n = 28; percreta, n = 20). All patients were accepted cesarean section deliveries. No statistically significance could be detected regarding to maternal age, BMI, gravidity, parity, previous cesarean deliveries and the gestational age at MRI examination.
Table 1
Clinical Features of the Study Groups (n/%)
Characteristic | Patients with MH (n = 81) | Patients without MH (n = 93) | Statistic ( t//Z/χ2 ) | P value |
Maternal age | 32.04 ± 4.06 | 31.20 ± 4.17 | 1.329 | 0.185 |
BMI (kg/m2) | 25.85 ± 3.19 | 25.69 ± 3.89 | 0.301 | 0.764 |
Gravidity | 3(2, 4) | 3(2, 4) | 1.200 | 0.230 |
Parity | 2(1, 2) | 2(1, 2) | 0.625 | 0.532 |
Number of abortions | 1(1, 2) | 1(1, 2) | 1.331 | 0.183 |
Number of previous cesarean delivery | 1(1, 2) | 1(1, 2) | 0.552 | 0.581 |
Previous history of placental previa | 9 (11.11) | 5 (5.38) | 1.924 | 0.165 |
Gestational age at MRI (weeks) | 33.33 ± 2.12 | 33.60 ± 1.76 | 0.923 | 0.358 |
Prenatal vaginal bleeding | 27(33.33) | 25(26.88) | 0.860 | 0.354 |
Gestational age at delivery (weeks) | 35.23 ± 1.48 | 35.95 ± 1.14 | 3.621 | < 0.001 |
Neonatal birthweight (g) | 2415.56 ± 365.99 | 2723.66 ± 422.18 | 5.106 | < 0.001 |
Operation time (min) | 92.30 ± 26.59 | 79.51 ± 28.29 | 3.058 | 0.003 |
Intraoperative blood loss (mL) | 2377.70 ± 657.17 | 1214.01 ± 364.06 | 14.688 | < 0.001 |
Blood transfusion (mL) | 1802.10 ± 634.35 | 751.51 ± 396.05 | 13.277 | < 0.001 |
ICU admission | 17 (20.99) | 7 (7.53) | 6.597 | 0.010 |
Hysterectomy | 6 (7.41) | 1 (1.08) | 4.496 | 0.034 |
The type of PAS | | | 14.452 | 0.001 |
Accreta | 33 (40.74) | 56 (60.22) | | |
Increta | 28 (34.57) | 32 (34.41) | | |
Percreta | 20 (24.69) | 5 (5.38) | | |
The gestational age at delivery (35.23 ± 1.48 vs 35.95 ± 1.14; P < 0.001) in patients with MH were significantly smaller than those in patients without MH, and neonatal birthweight in the MH group was lower (2415.56 ± 365.99 vs 2723.66 ± 422.18; P < 0.001). Longer operating times (92.30 ± 26.59 vs 79.51 ± 28.29; P = 0.003) and more intraoperative blood loss (2377.70 ± 657.17 vs 1214.01 ± 364.06; P < 0.001) were found in the MH group than in the non-MH group. When considering the adverse clinical outcome, 17 (20.99%) parturient admitted into ICU, 6 (7.41%) underwent emergency hysterectomy and more blood transfusion (1802.10 ± 634.35 vs 751.51 ± 396.05; P < 0.001) due to massive bleeding and unstable vital signs (Table 1).
The identification of cervical length and volume between two radiologists reached almost perfect reliability, with Kappa values over 0.75 (Table 2). Table 3 demonstrated the ORs for evaluation of MH in relation to cervical length and volume. Patients with small cervical volume (< 20.00 cm3) got higher odds ratio for MH (6.384, 95% CI 2.517–9.657, P < 0.001).
Table 2
Interobserver Reliability of Magnetic Resonance Imaging (MRI) in the Measurement of MRI Features
MRI features | Either | Both | Agree | Kappa | Interpretation |
Cervical length | 93 (53.448) | 85 (48.851) | 95.402 | 0.908 | Almost perfect |
Cervical volume | 95 (54.598) | 88 (50.575) | 95.977 | 0.919 | Almost perfect |
Presented here as No. (%). Number (and proportion) of studies in which either radiologist or both radiologists reported a finding. Percentage of studies in which they agreed |
Table 3
Multivariate Logistic Regression Analysis of Risk Factors for Patients with MH
Variable | OR (95%CI) | P |
Cervical length (cm) | | < 0.001 |
> 3.00 | 1 | |
< 3.00 | 3.512 (1.836–6.927) | |
Cervical volume (cm3) | | < 0.001 |
> 20.00 | 1 | |
< 20.00 | 6.384 (2.517–9.657) | |
The optimum cut-off values for the cervical length (30 mm) and cervical volume (20 cm3) were identified by ROC analysis (Table 4).
Table 4
Receiver Operating Characteristic Analyses for Prediction of Massive Hemorrhage Based on Cervical Length and Cervical Area
Variable | Cut-off | Sensitivity % (95% CI) | Specificity % (95% CI) | PPV % | NVP % | P |
Cervical length (mm) | 28 | 81.11 (73.55–87.62) | 88.33 (80.58–93.39) | 85.82 | 84.30 | < 0.001 |
Cervical length (mm) | 30 | 86.53 (78.81–90.95) | 83.94 (77.23–90.65) | 82.43 | 87.74 | < 0.001 |
Cervical length (mm) | 32 | 83.52 (76.81–88.76) | 84.08 (79.27–92.85) | 82.04 | 85.41 | < 0.001 |
Cervical volume (cm3) | 18 | 84.46 (79.25–89.90) | 87.21 (81.17–91.92) | 85.19 | 86.56 | < 0.001 |
Cervical volume (cm3) | 20 | 91.53 (83.91–94.06) | 83.61 (77.88–89.05) | 82.94 | 84.63 | < 0.001 |
Cervical volume (cm3) | 22 | 88.57 (80.54–91.93) | 86.35 (80.90-90.38) | 84.96 | 82.47 | < 0.001 |
PPV, Positive predictive value; NPV, Negative predictive value |
Subcolumn graphs showed that statistic significance was found in cervical length and volume between patients with MH and patients without MH (Fig. 3). As illustrated by the scatter diagram (Fig. 4), Cervical length and volume correlated negatively with the amount of intraoperative blood loss. Based on the ROC curve, the sensitivity, specificity, positive predictive value (PPV) and negative predictive value (NPV) of the cervical length less than 30 mm for predicting cases at high risk for MH were 86.53%, 83.94%, 82.43%, 87.74%, with an area under the curve (AUC) of 0.812. The sensitivity, specificity, PPV and NPV were 91.53%, 83.61%, 82.94% and 84.63%, respectively, of the cervical volume less than 20 cm3 for the prediction of MH with AUC 0.845 (Fig. 5). The AUC increased to 0.906, combining cervical length with cervical volume.