ArticleBMC pregnancy and childbirth2026
The diagnostic value of multiple schemes of MRI standard features combined with risk factors and ultrasound for Placenta accreta spectrum.
Article in BMC pregnancy and childbirth, 2026. 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
11 authors.
Funding
Abstract
objectiveThis study aims to identify the most diagnostically valuable features among the 11 MRI features of Placenta accreta spectrum (PAS) described in the joint consensus statement by the Society of Abdominal Radiology (SAR) and the European Society of Urogenital Radiology (ESUR), and to evaluate the diagnostic efficacy of MRI, risk factors, and ultrasound (US) used alone or in combination for prenatal PAS diagnosis.
methodsThis retrospective study included 199 pregnant women who delivered at Zhengzhou Central Hospital from November 2018 to December 2022. Standardized evaluations of Risk Factors, US, and MRI features were conducted, and subjects were divided into PAS (89 cases) and non-PAS groups (110 cases). Chi-square tests, logistic regression, and the Bootstrap method were used to identify MRI features with intergroup differences. Diagnostic scheme efficacy was compared using the area under the curve (AUC), and improvements were assessed using the net reclassification improvement index (NRI) and integrated discrimination improvement index (IDI). The final diagnosis of PAS was based on surgical and/or pathological findings according to the International Federation of Gynecology and Obstetrics (FIGO) criteria.
resultsThree Risk Factors (caesarean delivery (CD) history, placenta previa, advanced maternal age) and three MRI features (T2-dark intraplacental bands, Loss of retroplacental T2-hypointense line, and Asymmetric shape/thickening of the placenta) showed statistical differences. The AUC for Risk Factors, US, and MRI alone was > 0.8. Combined schemes (MRI + US and MRI + US + Risk Factors) had higher efficacy, with MRI + US + Risk Factors demonstrating the highest efficacy.
conclusionThis study identifies three key standardized MRI features and three key risk factors to simplify clinical application. For high-risk pregnant women, a multimodal approach combining risk assessment, ultrasound, and standardized MRI features produced the highest diagnostic performance, but prospective external validation is required before broader clinical implementation.
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.