Please use this identifier to cite or link to this item: https://hdl.handle.net/2440/137422
Citations
Scopus Web of Science® Altmetric
?
?
Full metadata record
DC FieldValueLanguage
dc.contributor.authorEdwards, C.-
dc.contributor.authorCavanagh, E.-
dc.contributor.authorKumar, S.-
dc.contributor.authorClifton, V.L.-
dc.contributor.authorBorg, D.J.-
dc.contributor.authorPriddle, J.-
dc.contributor.authorWille, M.L.-
dc.contributor.authorDrovandi, C.-
dc.contributor.authorFontanarosa, D.-
dc.date.issued2023-
dc.identifier.citationPlacenta, 2023; 131:23-27-
dc.identifier.issn0143-4004-
dc.identifier.issn1532-3102-
dc.identifier.urihttps://hdl.handle.net/2440/137422-
dc.description.abstractIntroduction: Ultrasound elastography shows diagnostic promise via the non-invasive determination of placental elastic properties. A limitation is a potential for inadequate measurements from posterior placentae. This study aimed to analyse placental position’s influence on measures of shear wave elastography (SWV). Methods: SWV elastography measurements were obtained via ultrasound at 24, 28 and 36 weeks gestation from 238 pregnancies. . The placental position was labelled as either anterior, posterior or fundal/lateral. Average SWV measurements (m/s) and the corresponding standard deviations (SD) were used for data analysis. Results: There was a statistically significant difference between SWV recorded from anterior (1.33 ± 0.19)m/s and posterior (1.39 ± 0.18)m/s placentae (p < 0.001). However, the average sampling depth between these groups was significantly different (3.98 cm vs. 5.38 cm, p < 0.001). There was no statistically significant difference between SWV when measurements were compared at similar depths, regardless of placental location. The addition of placental position to a previously developed mixed-effects model confirmed placental position did not result in improved SWV measurements. In this model, sampling depth remained the best predictor for SWV. Conclusions: This study showed that placental position does not influence the accuracy or reliability of SWV.-
dc.description.statementofresponsibilityChristopher Edwards, Erika Cavanagh, Sailesh Kumar, Vicki L. Clifton b, c, Danielle J. Borg, Jacob Priddle, Marie-Luise Wille, Christopher Drovandi, Davide Fontanarosa-
dc.language.isoen-
dc.publisherElsevier-
dc.rights© 2022 Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved.-
dc.source.urihttp://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.placenta.2022.11.016-
dc.subjectPlacenta-
dc.subjectHumans-
dc.subjectUltrasonography-
dc.subjectReproducibility of Results-
dc.subjectGestational Age-
dc.subjectPregnancy-
dc.subjectFemale-
dc.subjectElasticity Imaging Techniques-
dc.subject.meshPlacenta-
dc.subject.meshHumans-
dc.subject.meshUltrasonography-
dc.subject.meshReproducibility of Results-
dc.subject.meshGestational Age-
dc.subject.meshPregnancy-
dc.subject.meshFemale-
dc.subject.meshElasticity Imaging Techniques-
dc.titleShear wave velocity measurement of the placenta is not limited by placental location-
dc.typeJournal article-
dc.identifier.doi10.1016/j.placenta.2022.11.016-
dc.relation.grantNHMRC-
pubs.publication-statusPublished-
dc.identifier.orcidClifton, V.L. [0000-0002-4892-6748]-
Appears in Collections:Obstetrics and Gynaecology publications

Files in This Item:
There are no files associated with this item.


Items in DSpace are protected by copyright, with all rights reserved, unless otherwise indicated.