Caroline Lorenzoni Almeida Ghezzi1,2, Cristiano Kohler Silva1, Aline Spader Casagrande1,2, Stephanie Sander Westphalen1,2, Cristiano Caetano Salazar3,4, Janete Vettorazzi3,4,5,6. 1. Department of Radiology, Hospital de Clínicas de Porto Alegre (HCPA), Porto Alegre, Brazil. 2. Department of Radiology, Hospital Moinhos de Vento, Porto Alegre, Brazil. 3. Department of Obstetrics and Gynecology, Hospital de Clínicas de Porto Alegre (HCPA), Porto Alegre, Brazil. 4. Department of Obstetrics and Gynecology, Hospital Moinhos de Vento, Porto Alegre, Brazil. 5. Postgraduate Program in Health Sciences: Gynecology and Obstetrics at Universidade Federal do Rio Grande do Sul (UFRGS), Porto Alegre, Brazil. 6. School of Medicine, UFRGS, Porto Alegre, Brazil.
Abstract
OBJECTIVES: There have been no investigations on the association between previous abdominopelvic MRI experience without placental MRI experience and diagnostic accuracy of placenta accreta spectrum (PAS). To evaluate the diagnostic performance of radiologists with different experience levels in interpreting PAS-related MRI findings. METHODS: This retrospective study included 60 women who underwent MRI for placental assessment between 2016 and 2020. MR images were reviewed by four radiologists who were blinded to the clinical outcomes and had different experience levels in interpreting PAS-related MRI findings. The radiologists' diagnostic performance was evaluated according to the pathologic and surgical outcomes. Simple κ statistics were calculated to determine agreement among the radiologists. RESULTS: Of 60 women, 46 were diagnosed with PAS. The maternal age mean ± SD was 33.0 years ± 5.0 for the PAS absent group and 36.0 ± 4.3 for the PAS present group (p = 0.013). Overall, the most experienced radiologist had the highest sensitivity (100%, 95% confidence interval (CI): 92.3-100%) and NPV (100%, 95% CI: 63.1-100%) in PAS diagnoses. However, the PPV and specificity were independent of experience. The most experienced radiologist had the highest diagnostic accuracy in PAS (90%, 95% CI: 79.5-96.2%) and placenta percreta (95%, 95% CI: 86.1-99.0%). There was a strong association between definitive PAS diagnoses and the highest experience level. The κ values for the interobserver agreement regarding PAS diagnoses were 0.67 for the most experienced radiologist (p < 0.001) and 0.38, 0.40, and 0.43 for the other radiologists (p = 0.001) and regarding placenta percreta diagnoses were 0.87 for the senior radiologist (p < 0.001) and 0.63, 0.57, and 0.62 for the other radiologists (p < 0.001). CONCLUSION: Previous experience in interpreting PAS-related MRI findings plays a significant role in accurately interpreting such imaging findings. Previous abdominopelvic MRI experience without specific placental MRI experience did not improve diagnostic performance. ADVANCES IN KNOWLEDGE: We believe that our study makes a significant contribution to the literature and that this paper will be of interest to the readership of your journal because to the best of our knowledge, this study is the first in which the correlation between previous experience in abdominopelvic MRI with no specific experience in PAS-related MRI and diagnostic accuracy of radiologists has been explored. Our results could aid in setting up specialized multidisciplinary teams to assist women with PAS disorders.
OBJECTIVES: There have been no investigations on the association between previous abdominopelvic MRI experience without placental MRI experience and diagnostic accuracy of placenta accreta spectrum (PAS). To evaluate the diagnostic performance of radiologists with different experience levels in interpreting PAS-related MRI findings. METHODS: This retrospective study included 60 women who underwent MRI for placental assessment between 2016 and 2020. MR images were reviewed by four radiologists who were blinded to the clinical outcomes and had different experience levels in interpreting PAS-related MRI findings. The radiologists' diagnostic performance was evaluated according to the pathologic and surgical outcomes. Simple κ statistics were calculated to determine agreement among the radiologists. RESULTS: Of 60 women, 46 were diagnosed with PAS. The maternal age mean ± SD was 33.0 years ± 5.0 for the PAS absent group and 36.0 ± 4.3 for the PAS present group (p = 0.013). Overall, the most experienced radiologist had the highest sensitivity (100%, 95% confidence interval (CI): 92.3-100%) and NPV (100%, 95% CI: 63.1-100%) in PAS diagnoses. However, the PPV and specificity were independent of experience. The most experienced radiologist had the highest diagnostic accuracy in PAS (90%, 95% CI: 79.5-96.2%) and placenta percreta (95%, 95% CI: 86.1-99.0%). There was a strong association between definitive PAS diagnoses and the highest experience level. The κ values for the interobserver agreement regarding PAS diagnoses were 0.67 for the most experienced radiologist (p < 0.001) and 0.38, 0.40, and 0.43 for the other radiologists (p = 0.001) and regarding placenta percreta diagnoses were 0.87 for the senior radiologist (p < 0.001) and 0.63, 0.57, and 0.62 for the other radiologists (p < 0.001). CONCLUSION: Previous experience in interpreting PAS-related MRI findings plays a significant role in accurately interpreting such imaging findings. Previous abdominopelvic MRI experience without specific placental MRI experience did not improve diagnostic performance. ADVANCES IN KNOWLEDGE: We believe that our study makes a significant contribution to the literature and that this paper will be of interest to the readership of your journal because to the best of our knowledge, this study is the first in which the correlation between previous experience in abdominopelvic MRI with no specific experience in PAS-related MRI and diagnostic accuracy of radiologists has been explored. Our results could aid in setting up specialized multidisciplinary teams to assist women with PAS disorders.
Authors: Carri R Warshak; Ramez Eskander; Andrew D Hull; Angela L Scioscia; Robert F Mattrey; Kurt Benirschke; Robert Resnik Journal: Obstet Gynecol Date: 2006-09 Impact factor: 7.661
Authors: F Finazzo; F D'antonio; G Masselli; F Forlani; J Palacios-Jaraquemada; G Minneci; S Gambarini; I Timor-Tritsch; F Prefumo; D Buca; M Liberati; A Khalil; G Cali Journal: Ultrasound Obstet Gynecol Date: 2020-04 Impact factor: 7.299
Authors: Khaled M Elsayes; Andrew T Trout; Aaron M Friedkin; Peter S Liu; Ronald O Bude; Joel F Platt; Christine O Menias Journal: Radiographics Date: 2009 Sep-Oct Impact factor: 5.333
Authors: Lisa Allen; Eric Jauniaux; Sebastian Hobson; Jessica Papillon-Smith; Michael A Belfort Journal: Int J Gynaecol Obstet Date: 2018-03 Impact factor: 3.561
Authors: Brett D Einerson; Christina E Rodriguez; Anne M Kennedy; Paula J Woodward; Meghan A Donnelly; Robert M Silver Journal: Am J Obstet Gynecol Date: 2018-03-20 Impact factor: 8.661
Authors: Aoife Kilcoyne; Anuradha S Shenoy-Bhangle; Drucilla J Roberts; Rachel Clark Sisodia; Debra A Gervais; Susanna I Lee Journal: AJR Am J Roentgenol Date: 2016-10-20 Impact factor: 3.959