ArticleEuropean radiology2026
Endorsing consensus interpretation for diagnosing placenta accreta spectrum disorders on MRI.
Article in European radiology, 2026. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 1 paper.
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.
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.
Who cites it
1 citing paper in PubMed.
- Advanced liver fibrosis detection using a two-stage deep learning approach on standard T2-weighted MRI.Abdominal radiology (New York) · 2026Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
16 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
objectivesTo determine the performance of MRI features alone and combined in a model for the diagnosis of placenta accreta spectrum (PAS) disorders in pregnant women. MATERIALS AND
methodsThis single health system IRB-approved retrospective study included 131 pregnant women who underwent MRI for placental (n = 122) or fetal (n = 9, controls) indications (2016-2021). Three independent observers assessed 11 PAS features on MRI, endorsed in prior studies, with consensus adjudication of discordances by 2 separate expert observers. The reference standard was established by intra-operative findings and/or pathology. Univariable and multivariable logistic regression and ROC analysis evaluated MRI feature performance for PAS diagnosis alone and combined in a model.
results131 pregnant patients (mean age 36 years, range 21-54 years; mean gestational age 28 weeks) were included. PAS was present in 54/131 (41.2%) patients. Consensus adjudication demonstrated that all MRI features and history of prior deliveries (vaginal or caesarean section) were associated with PAS (p ≤ 0.0003). Most MRI features, except the "serosal vessel sign," were associated with PAS for the independent observers (p < 0.04). At consensus, "loss of T2-retroplacental line" (sensitivity 0.87/specificity 0.43/p = 0.0003) and "myometrial thinning" (sensitivity 0.87/specificity 0.47/p < 0.0001) showed the highest sensitivity for PAS, while "bladder vessel sign" had the highest specificity (sensitivity 0.28/specificity 1.0/p < 0.0001). A multivariable model comprised of "uterine/placental bulge," "focal exophytic placental mass," and "bladder vessel sign" demonstrated an AUC = 0.83 (95% confidence interval 0.76-0.83) for PAS diagnosis using consensus data.
conclusionA model based on consensus interpretation of MRI findings demonstrated good performance for diagnosing PAS. KEY POINTS: Question The lack of validated MRI criteria and inter-observer variability limits MRI's reliability for noninvasive placenta accreta spectrum (PAS) diagnosis in pregnant women. Findings MRI features demonstrated variable sensitivity and specificity across readers for PAS diagnosis, often at a trade-off, highlighting the need for consensus review. Clinical relevance A model based on consensus interpretation of MRI findings, comprised of "uterine/placental bulge," "exophytic placental mass," and "bladder vessel sign," demonstrated good performance for diagnosing PAS, which is essential given the risk of maternal morbidity and mortality at delivery.
Indexed as
Identifiers
40689998What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
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.