AIM: The aim of this study was to compare shear wave cervical elasticity between term and preterm delivery group. METHODS: A prospective cohort study was conducted in enrolled 158 pregnant women at 18-24 weeks of gestation who come for second trimester scan consecutively. Transvaginal ultrasonography for cervical length as well as cervical elasticity in five regions of interest was performed. Intraobserver and interobserver reproducibility were evaluated. Gestational age at deliveries was followed, and cervical shear wave elasticity between term and preterm group was compared. RESULTS: A total of 158 pregnant women were enrolled in this study while 120 pregnancies data were collected for subsequent analysis, 10 pregnancies spontaneously delivered during the preterm period and 110 pregnancies delivered at term. Intraobserver and interobserver reproducibility were high; however, cervical shear wave elasticity in both groups were not significantly different (external anterior lip 2.29 ± 0.66 and 2.45 ± 0.58 m/s, P value 0.30, internal anterior lip 2.74 ± 0.96 and 2.80 ± 0.61 m/s, P value 0.83). Nonsignificant correlations of cervical shear wave elasticity with gestational age and cervical length (r = -0.1 and r = 0.02, respectively) were demonstrated. CONCLUSION: Cervical shear wave elasticity in preterm and term groups was not significantly different when measured at 18-24 weeks of gestation. There are nonsignificant correlations between cervical shear wave elasticity, gestational age and cervical length. Cervical shear wave elastography alone should not be used as a predictor for preterm delivery.
AIM: The aim of this study was to compare shear wave cervical elasticity between term and preterm delivery group. METHODS: A prospective cohort study was conducted in enrolled 158 pregnant women at 18-24 weeks of gestation who come for second trimester scan consecutively. Transvaginal ultrasonography for cervical length as well as cervical elasticity in five regions of interest was performed. Intraobserver and interobserver reproducibility were evaluated. Gestational age at deliveries was followed, and cervical shear wave elasticity between term and preterm group was compared. RESULTS: A total of 158 pregnant women were enrolled in this study while 120 pregnancies data were collected for subsequent analysis, 10 pregnancies spontaneously delivered during the preterm period and 110 pregnancies delivered at term. Intraobserver and interobserver reproducibility were high; however, cervical shear wave elasticity in both groups were not significantly different (external anterior lip 2.29 ± 0.66 and 2.45 ± 0.58 m/s, P value 0.30, internal anterior lip 2.74 ± 0.96 and 2.80 ± 0.61 m/s, P value 0.83). Nonsignificant correlations of cervical shear wave elasticity with gestational age and cervical length (r = -0.1 and r = 0.02, respectively) were demonstrated. CONCLUSION: Cervical shear wave elasticity in preterm and term groups was not significantly different when measured at 18-24 weeks of gestation. There are nonsignificant correlations between cervical shear wave elasticity, gestational age and cervical length. Cervical shear wave elastography alone should not be used as a predictor for preterm delivery.