See the published version of this preprint at BMC Pregnancy and Childbirth.
This is a preprint, a preliminary version of a manuscript that has not completed peer review at a journal. Research Square does not conduct peer review prior to posting preprints. The posting of a preprint on this server should not be interpreted as an endorsement of its validity or suitability for dissemination as established information or for guiding clinical practice.
Learn more about In Review
Research article
Hong Pu
Sichuan Academy of Medical Sciences and Sichuan People's Hospital
Corresponding Author
License:
This work is licensed under a CC BY 4.0 License. Read Full License
Objective The primary aim was to investigate whether the parameters from IVIM can be used to differentiate patients with PAS disorders complicating placenta previa. A second aim was to determine whether these parameters can be used to differentiate different categories of PAS disorders complicating placenta previa.
Methods All the patients had placenta previa, including 16 patients with placenta accreta, 51 patients with increta, 8 patients with percreta and 24 patients without PAS disorders between 28+0 and 39+6 weeks. All women underwent MRI examination including an IVIM sequence at 1.5T scanner. The perfusion fraction(f), pseudodiffusion coefficient (D*) and standard diffusion coefficient(D) were calculated.
Results Women with PAS disorders had a higher perfusion fraction (P<0.05) than women without the disease. Multiple comparisons showed perfusion fraction in patients without PAS disorders was significantly lower than in patients with placenta accreta and percreta(P<0.05), but was not lower than in patients with increta(p>0.05). Conclusion Patients with placenta accreta and percreta differ in placental perfusion fraction from women with increta and without PAS disorders. The perfusion fraction can be used as a reliable index to evaluate placenta perfusion fraction.
Keywords
PAS, disorders, MRI, placenta, IVIM
Figure 1
Figure 2
Figure 3
Figure 4
Loading...
Badges
Prescreen
This manuscript passed our Prescreen assessment
Complete author information
Appropriate declaration statements
Potential risks to human health
Prescreen
Peer Review Timeline
CURRENT STATUS: Published
View the published article at BMC Pregnancy and Childbirth.
No community comments so far
Submission checks complete
On 12 Dec, 2019
Editorial decision: Accept
On 12 Dec, 2019
No comments provided
Editorial decision: Minor revision
On 10 Dec, 2019
Editor assigned
On 08 Dec, 2019
Submission checks complete
On 07 Dec, 2019
Editor invited
On 07 Dec, 2019
No comments provided
Review #3 received
Received 03 Dec, 2019
Editorial decision: Minor revision
On 03 Dec, 2019
Reviewer #4 agreed
On 02 Dec, 2019
Reviewer #5 agreed
On 02 Dec, 2019
Reviewer #3 agreed
On 26 Nov, 2019
Review #2 received
Received 24 Nov, 2019
Review #1 received
Received 18 Nov, 2019
Reviewer #2 agreed
On 11 Nov, 2019
Reviewers invited
Invitations sent on 08 Nov, 2019
Reviewer #1 agreed
On 08 Nov, 2019
Editor assigned
On 07 Nov, 2019
Submission checks complete
On 06 Nov, 2019
Editor invited
On 06 Nov, 2019
Version 1
Posted 21 Oct, 2019
No comments provided
Editorial decision: Major revision
On 31 Oct, 2019
Review #1 received
Received 24 Oct, 2019
Review #3 received
Received 24 Oct, 2019
Review #2 received
Received 24 Oct, 2019
Reviewers invited
Invitations sent on 18 Oct, 2019
Reviewer #1 agreed
On 18 Oct, 2019
Reviewer #2 agreed
On 18 Oct, 2019
Reviewer #3 agreed
On 18 Oct, 2019
Reviewer #4 agreed
On 18 Oct, 2019
Submission checks complete
On 17 Oct, 2019
Editor assigned
On 16 Oct, 2019
First submitted
On 15 Oct, 2019
Editor invited
On 15 Oct, 2019
Metrics
Comments: 0
PDF Downloads: ...
HTML Views: ...
Subject Areas
Maternal & Fetal Medicine
Learn more about our company.
See the published version of this preprint at BMC Pregnancy and Childbirth.
This is a preprint, a preliminary version of a manuscript that has not completed peer review at a journal. Research Square does not conduct peer review prior to posting preprints. The posting of a preprint on this server should not be interpreted as an endorsement of its validity or suitability for dissemination as established information or for guiding clinical practice.
Learn more about In Review
Research article
Hong Pu
Sichuan Academy of Medical Sciences and Sichuan People's Hospital
Corresponding Author
Badges
Prescreen
This manuscript passed our Prescreen assessment
Complete author information
Appropriate declaration statements
Potential risks to human health
Prescreen
Peer Review Timeline
CURRENT STATUS: Published
View the published article at BMC Pregnancy and Childbirth.
No community comments so far
Submission checks complete
On 12 Dec, 2019
Editorial decision: Accept
On 12 Dec, 2019
No comments provided
Editorial decision: Minor revision
On 10 Dec, 2019
Editor assigned
On 08 Dec, 2019
Submission checks complete
On 07 Dec, 2019
Editor invited
On 07 Dec, 2019
No comments provided
Review #3 received
Received 03 Dec, 2019
Editorial decision: Minor revision
On 03 Dec, 2019
Reviewer #4 agreed
On 02 Dec, 2019
Reviewer #5 agreed
On 02 Dec, 2019
Reviewer #3 agreed
On 26 Nov, 2019
Review #2 received
Received 24 Nov, 2019
Review #1 received
Received 18 Nov, 2019
Reviewer #2 agreed
On 11 Nov, 2019
Reviewers invited
Invitations sent on 08 Nov, 2019
Reviewer #1 agreed
On 08 Nov, 2019
Editor assigned
On 07 Nov, 2019
Submission checks complete
On 06 Nov, 2019
Editor invited
On 06 Nov, 2019
Version 1
Posted 21 Oct, 2019
No comments provided
Editorial decision: Major revision
On 31 Oct, 2019
Review #1 received
Received 24 Oct, 2019
Review #3 received
Received 24 Oct, 2019
Review #2 received
Received 24 Oct, 2019
Reviewers invited
Invitations sent on 18 Oct, 2019
Reviewer #1 agreed
On 18 Oct, 2019
Reviewer #2 agreed
On 18 Oct, 2019
Reviewer #3 agreed
On 18 Oct, 2019
Reviewer #4 agreed
On 18 Oct, 2019
Submission checks complete
On 17 Oct, 2019
Editor assigned
On 16 Oct, 2019
First submitted
On 15 Oct, 2019
Editor invited
On 15 Oct, 2019
Metrics
Comments: 0
PDF Downloads: ...
HTML Views: ...
Subject Areas
Maternal & Fetal Medicine
License:
This work is licensed under a CC BY 4.0 License. Read Full License
View the published article at BMC Pregnancy and Childbirth.
Objective The primary aim was to investigate whether the parameters from IVIM can be used to differentiate patients with PAS disorders complicating placenta previa. A second aim was to determine whether these parameters can be used to differentiate different categories of PAS disorders complicating placenta previa.
Methods All the patients had placenta previa, including 16 patients with placenta accreta, 51 patients with increta, 8 patients with percreta and 24 patients without PAS disorders between 28+0 and 39+6 weeks. All women underwent MRI examination including an IVIM sequence at 1.5T scanner. The perfusion fraction(f), pseudodiffusion coefficient (D*) and standard diffusion coefficient(D) were calculated.
Results Women with PAS disorders had a higher perfusion fraction (P<0.05) than women without the disease. Multiple comparisons showed perfusion fraction in patients without PAS disorders was significantly lower than in patients with placenta accreta and percreta(P<0.05), but was not lower than in patients with increta(p>0.05). Conclusion Patients with placenta accreta and percreta differ in placental perfusion fraction from women with increta and without PAS disorders. The perfusion fraction can be used as a reliable index to evaluate placenta perfusion fraction.
Figure 1
Figure 2
Figure 3
Figure 4
Loading...