| Literature DB >> 33060690 |
Qian Zhu1,2, Xiaoqing He1,2, Ling Jiang2,3, Guiling Liang1,2, Chenfeng Zhu1,2, Hongjie Pan4, Jian Zhang5,6, Judith Anna Huirne7.
Abstract
This study aimed to develop and validate a model for the preoperative prediction of the effectiveness of hysteroscopic resection of a uterine cesarean niche in patients with postmenstrual spotting. The predictive model was developed in a primary prospective cohort consisting of 208 patients with niche treated by hysteroscopic resection. Multivariable logistic regression analysis was performed to develop the predictive model, which incorporated preoperative menstrual characteristics and magnetic resonance imaging (MRI) findings. Surgical efficacy was defined as a decrease in postmenstrual spotting duration of at least 3 days at the 3-month follow-up compared with baseline. The predictive model was presented with a nomogram, and the performance was assessed with respect to its calibration, discrimination, and clinical use. Internal validation was performed using tenfold cross-validation. The predictive factors in the final model were as follows: preoperative menstrual duration, thickness of the residual myometrium (TRM), length, TRM/thickness of the adjacent myometrium ratio, angle γ, area, and presence of a lateral branch of the niche. The model showed good performance in predicting the effectiveness of hysteroscopic niche resection. Incorporating the preoperative duration of the menstrual period and MRI findings of the niche into an easy-to-use nomogram facilitates the individualized prediction of the effectiveness of a hysteroscopic niche resection by 26 Fr resectoscope, but multicenter prospective studies are needed to validate it.Entities:
Mesh:
Year: 2020 PMID: 33060690 PMCID: PMC7566491 DOI: 10.1038/s41598-020-74622-8
Source DB: PubMed Journal: Sci Rep ISSN: 2045-2322 Impact factor: 4.379
Figure 1Flow chart.
Characteristics of patients with niche before and 3 months after hysteroscopic surgery.
| Variables | Before surgery (n = 208) | After surgery (n = 208) | p value |
|---|---|---|---|
| Duration of menstruation (days) | 13 (10,15) | 8 (7, 11) | < 0.01 |
| Postmenstrual spotting (days) | 6 (3, 8) | 1 (0, 4) | < 0.01 |
| Spotting at the end of the menstruation (days) | 6 (3, 8) | 1 (0, 4) | < 0.01 |
| Intermenstrual spotting (days) | 0 (0, 0) | 0 (0, 0) | 0.82 |
| 6 (5, 7) | 2 (1, 4) | < 0.01 | |
| 0 (0, 3) | 0 (0, 3) | 1.00 | |
| 1 (0, 3) | 0 (0, 3) | 0.85 | |
| 2.10 ± 1.05 | 3.53 ± 1.41 | < 0.01 | |
Data are reported as mean ± standard deviation or as median (interquartile range, IQR) for each parameter.
Postmenstrual spotting days = the sum of the number of days spotting at the end of the menstruation and the number of days of intermenstrual spotting.
Baseline characteristics and histologic examination in the two groups.
| Variables | Effective group (n = 134) | Non-effective group (n = 74) | p value |
|---|---|---|---|
| 34.52 ± 4.53 | 34.70 ± 4.54 | 0.78 | |
| 2 (1,3) | 2 (1,3) | 0.63 | |
| 1.45 ± 0.62 | 1.34 ± 0.58 | 0.21 | |
| 1 (1,2) | 1 (1,2) | 0.68 | |
| 14 (12,15) | 12 (10,14) | < 0.01 | |
| 0 (0,3) | 0 (0,2) | 0.13 | |
| 0 (0,2) | 0 (0,2) | 0.22 | |
| 6 (5,8) | 5 (4,7) | 0.02 | |
| 2.06 ± 1.02 | 2.39 ± 1.02 | 0.02 | |
| 0.08 | |||
| YES | 72 (53.73%) | 30 (40.54%) | |
| NO | 62 (46.27%) | 44 (59.46%) |
Data are reported as mean ± standard deviation or median (interquartile range, IQR) or as n (valid percentage).
Preoperative characteristics defined as after CS prior to hysteroscopic surgery.
Preoperative MRI findings in the two groups.
| Variables | Effective group (n = 134) | Non-effective group (n = 74) | p value |
|---|---|---|---|
| 0.05 | |||
| < 9 | 70 (52.24%) | 28 (37.84%) | |
| ≥ 9 | 64 (47.76%) | 46 (62.16%) | |
| 0.02 | |||
| < 5 | 61 (45.52%) | 21 (28.38%) | |
| ≥ 5 | 74 (55.22%) | 53 (71.62%) | |
| 0.47 | |||
| < 12 | 71 (52.99%) | 43 (58.11%) | |
| ≥ 12 | 63 (47.01%) | 31 (41.89%) | |
| < 0.01 | |||
| < 2.2 | 12 (8.96%) | 27 (36.49%) | |
| ≥ 2.2 | 122 (91.04%) | 47 (63.51%) | |
| 0.27 | |||
| < 9 | 52 (38.81%) | 23 (31.08%) | |
| ≥ 9 | 82 (61.19%) | 51 (68.92%) | |
| < 0.01 | |||
| Mild (≥ 50%) | 37 (27.61%) | 4 (5.41%) | |
| Severe (< 50%) | 97 (72.39%) | 70 (94.59%) | |
| 0.47 | |||
| < 70° | 90 (67.16%) | 46 (62.16%) | |
| ≥ 70° | 44 (32.84%) | 28 (37.84%) | |
| 0.78 | |||
| < 70° | 57 (42.54%) | 30 (40.54%) | |
| ≥ 70° | 77 (57.46%) | 44 (59.46%) | |
| < 0.01 | |||
| < 90° | 66 (49.25%) | 19 (25.68%) | |
| ≥ 90° | 68 (50.75%) | 55 (74.32%) | |
| 0.67 | |||
| ≤ 90° | 9 (6.72%) | 2 (2.70%) | |
| 91°–180° | 52 (38.81%) | 31 (41.89%) | |
| 181°–270° | 58 (43.28%) | 32 (43.24%) | |
| ≥ 271° | 15 (11.19%) | 9 (12.16%) | |
| < 0.01 | |||
| < 50 | 126 (94.03%) | 51 (68.92%) | |
| ≥ 50 | 8 (5.97%) | 23 (31.08%) | |
| 0.33 | |||
| Within A and B | 109 (81.34%) | 56 (75.68%) | |
| Outside A and B | 25 (18.66%) | 18 (24.32%) | |
| 0.46 | |||
| < 3 | 85 (63.43%) | 43 (58.11%) | |
| ≥ 3 | 49 (36.57%) | 31 (41.89%) | |
| 0.55 | |||
| < 5 | 51 (38.06%) | 25 (33.78%) | |
| ≥ 5 | 83 (61.94%) | 49 (66.22%) | |
| 0.09 | |||
| Linear | 13 (9.70%) | 7 (9.46%) | |
| Triangle | 33 (24.63%) | 9 (12.16%) | |
| Irregular rectangular | 88 (65.67%) | 58 (78.38%) | |
| 0.18 | |||
| YES | 17 (12.68%) | 5 (6.76%) | |
| NO | 117 (87.31%) | 69 (93.24%) | |
| 0.57 | |||
| YES | 8 (5.98%) | 6 (8.11%) | |
| NO | 128 (95.52%) | 68 (91.89%) | |
| 0.98 | |||
| YES | 11 (8.21%) | 6 (8.11%) | |
| NO | 123 (91.79%) | 68 (91.89%) |
CS = cesarean section; MRI = magnetic resonance image; TRM = thickness of the residual myometrium; TAM = thickness of the adjacent myometrium; TRM/TAM = the ratio of myometrial thickness at the scar to the thickness of adjacent myometrium.
Angle α was defined as the angle of the upper margin of the defect; Angle β was defined as the angle of lower margin of the defect; Angle γ was defined as the angle of the apex of the defect; Angle θ was defined as angle between the cervical axis and the axis of uterine corpus.
A: the endpoint of upper edge of niche on MRI; B: the endpoint of lower edge of niche on MRI; C: the apex of niche on MRI.
Data are reported as mean ± standard deviation as median (interquartile range, IQR) or as n (valid percentage).
Risk Factors for the effectiveness of hysteroscopic surgery for niche.
| Model 1 | Model 2 | |||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Intercept and Variable | β | Odds Ratio (95% CI) | p value | β | Odds Ratio (95% CI) | p value |
| Intercept | − 0.77 | 0.46 (0.02–9.94) | 0.62 | − 2.19 | 0.11 (0.03–3.16) | 0.19 |
| 0.27 | 1.30 (1.22–1.52) | < 0.01 | 0.28 | 1.32 (1.14–1.55) | < 0.01 | |
| 1.24 | 3.45 (1.43–8.33) | < 0.01 | 1.36 | 3.91 (1.58–9.67) | < 0.01 | |
| − 0.63 | 0.53 (0.26–1.08) | 0.08 | − 0.58 | 0.58 (0.27–1.14) | 0.11 | |
| − 0.89 | 0.41 (0.20–0.86) | 0.02 | − 1.12 | 0.32 (0.15–0.71) | < 0.01 | |
| − 1.91 | 0.15 (0.05–0.43) | < 0.01 | − 1.90 | 0.15 (0.05–0.44) | < 0.01 | |
| 1.09 | 2.97 (0.82–10.67) | 0.03 | 0.1 | 2.99 (0.80–11.17) | 0.10 | |
| 1.86 | 6.41 (1.85–22.24) | < 0.01 | 1.4 | 6.15 (1.70–22.24) | 0.01 | |
| NA | NA | 0.85 | 2.35 (1.10–4.99) | 0.03 | ||
| 0.834 | 0.826 | |||||
TRM = thickness of the residual myometrium; AUC = the area under the receiver operating characteristic curve.
Figure 2Nomogram of the predictive model. TRM (1: ≥ 2.2 mm; 2: < 2.2 mm); Length (1: < 9 mm; 2: ≥ 9 mm); Angle γ (1: < 90°; 2: ≥ 90°); Area (1: < 50mm2;2: ≥ 50 mm2); Lateral branch (0: No; 1:Yes); The degree of severity of the niche (1: Severe (TRM/TAM < 50%) ; 2: Mild (TRM/TAM ≥ 50%)).
Figure 3Receiver operating characteristic (ROC) curves of the predictive model. Area under the ROC curve to determine the predictive ability of the model, representing the sensitivity on the ordinate axis and specificity in the abscissa. The green line represented the model 1. The red line represented the model 2.
Figure 4Calibration plot of the predictive model. Calibration plot depicted the agreement between the predicted effective rate of hysteroscopic surgery and observed outcomes of effective rate. The y-axis represented the actual effective rate. The x-axis represented the predicted effective rate. The diagonal solid line represents a perfect prediction by an ideal model. The dotted line represented the performance of the model, of which a closer fit to the diagonal solid line represented a better prediction. (a) represented the model 1. (b) represented the model 2.
Figure 5Decision curve analysis (DCA) for the predictive model. The y-axis measures the net benefit. The blue line represented the assumption that all patients can benefit from hysteroscopic surgery. The gray line represented the assumption that no patients can benefit from hysteroscopic surgery. The green line represented the model 1. The red line represented the model 2. The net benefit was calculated by subtracting the proportion of all patients who are false positive from the proportion who are true positive, weighting by the relative harm of forgoing treatment compared with the negative consequences of an unnecessary treatment. Threshold probability is where the expected benefit of treatment is equal to the expected benefit of avoiding treatment.