Evidence map›Paper›PMID 27259500›Full record

ReviewJournal of medical ultrasonics (2001)2016

Cervical elastography during pregnancy: a critical review of current approaches with a focus on controversies and limitations.

Arrigo Fruscalzo, Edoardo Mazza, Helen Feltovich, Ralf Schmitz

Abstract readReview
PubMed Publisher
In one paragraph

Review in Journal of medical ultrasonics (2001), 2016. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 28 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
28citing papers in PubMed, 1 pooled it
6.2field-weighted citation impact, top 3% of its field
1 · What the graph read from it

What it found

Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.

The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.

2 · The registry

The trial behind it

Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.

Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

28 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it, 77 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Review
  3. Article
  4. Article
  5. Article
  6. Article
  7. Article
  8. Review
  9. Article
  10. Article
  11. Article
  12. Article
  13. Review
  14. Article
  15. Article
  16. Article
  17. Article
  18. Review
  19. Review
  20. Cervical Characterization with Tactile-Ultrasound Probe.Open journal of obstetrics and gynecology · 2020
    Article
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

4 authors at 4 institutions in 3 countries.

Arrigo FruscalzoDepartment of Obstetrics and Gynecology, St. Franziskus Hospital, Münster, Germany. fruscal@libero.it.
Edoardo MazzaInstitute of Mechanical Systems, ETH Zurich, 8092, Zurich, Switzerland.
Helen FeltovichDepartment of Obstetrics and Gynecology, Division of Maternal-Fetal Medicine, Intermountain Healthcare, Provo, UT, USA.
Ralf SchmitzDepartment of Obstetrics and Gynecology, University Hospital of Münster, Münster, Germany.
ETH Zurich · CHIntermountain Healthcare · USSt. Franziskus Hospital · DEUniversity Hospital Münster · DE

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

In normal pregnancy, the cervix functions as a protective mechanical barrier that must remain tight and closed. Premature remodeling and consecutive shortening occur in many cases of spontaneous preterm birth. Although the complex underlying physiology of normal and abnormal cervical remodeling is not fully understood, it is clear that cervical softening occurs prior to delivery, and inappropriate timing seems to be associated with preterm delivery. Also, degree of cervical softness is a component of the Bishop score currently used clinically to predict successful induction of labor. Therefore, the assessment of changes in cervical stiffness with ultrasound elastography techniques might be useful in the prediction of preterm delivery or successful induction of labor. Two different approaches for cervical elastography for quantitative determination of the physical properties of the pregnant cervix have been developed: strain elastography and shear wave elastography. Recently, several feasibility studies showed the reliability of these cervical elastography techniques for the prediction of preterm delivery and successful labor induction. In this review, we contrast strain elastography, which determines only relative values of tissue stiffness because the applied transducer pressure is unknown, with shear wave elastography, which provides, in principle at least, a more objective description of tissue softness. While more promising preliminary results involving these approaches to assessing cervical softness have been recently published, current limitations in technical implementation need to be addressed before elastography techniques will become clinically useful. We discuss these limitations and present challenges for future studies and equipment development.

Indexed as

Cervix UteriElasticity Imaging TechniquesFemaleHumansPregnancyPregnancy ComplicationsCervical elastographyCervix uteriDoppler ultrasoundPregnancyShear waveUltrasonography

Identifiers

PMID27259500
OpenAlexW2409423309

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.