ArticleArchives of gynecology and obstetrics2025
Comparative efficacy of MRI versus ultrasound in prenatal diagnosis of placenta accreta spectrum disorders: a single-tertiary center study.
Article in Archives of gynecology and obstetrics, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.
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
0 citing papers in PubMed.
No citing paper in PubMed yet.
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
6 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
aimThis study aimed to compare the diagnostic accuracy of ultrasound (US) and magnetic resonance imaging (MRI) in the detection of placenta accreta spectrum (PAS) disorders in a single tertiary care setting. MATERIALS AND
methodsAll eligible participants prospectively underwent both US and MRI examinations prior to delivery at our institution. Two experienced radiologists independently interpreted both the US and MRI findings. The interobserver agreement was assessed using the intraclass correlation coefficient (ICC) in a subset of twenty randomly selected participants. The diagnostic performance of each imaging modality was evaluated against the gold standard of surgical or pathological findings.
resultsIn a cohort of 131 pregnancies, the diagnostic performance of MRI and US was found to be comparable, with an accuracy (ACC) of 0.718 for MRI and 0.702 for US, respectively. In the subgroup of placental accrete cases, MRI demonstrated modestly higher performance than US (p = 0.023), while in the normal, increta, or percreta groups, the performance was equivalent. The ICC for both MRI and US was moderate, with values of 0.663 and 0.600, respectively. The most common causes of misdiagnosis for US were challenging patient positioning for US acquisition, thickened placenta, and prior cesarean section surgery. For MRI, the primary reason was the morphological changes occurring between the time of scanning and delivery.
conclusionOur findings indicate that MRI provides incremental value in the assessment of suspected placental accrete cases. Overall, MRI and US showed equivalent diagnostic performance for the confirmation of PAS disorders.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What 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.