Acute abdominal and pelvic pain in pregnancy: ESUR recommendations

Clinical sonochemotherapy of inoperable pancreatic cancer using diagnostic ultrasound and microbubbles: a multicentre, open-label, randomised, controlled trial

OBJECTIVES

Sonochemotherapy, which uses microbubble (MB)-assisted ultrasound (US) to deliver chemotherapeutic agents, has the potential to enhance tumour chemotherapy. The combination of US and MB has been demonstrated to prolong the survival of patients with pancreatic cancer. This phase 2 clinical trial aimed to determine the clinical efficacy and safety of sonochemotherapy for inoperable pancreatic ductal adenocarcinoma by using US and MB.

METHODS

Eighty-two patients with stage III or IV pancreatic cancer were recruited from July 2018 to March 2021 and followed up until September 2022. US treatment was performed with a modified diagnostic US scanner for 30 min after chemotherapeutic infusion. The primary endpoint was overall survival (OS), and the secondary endpoints were Eastern Cooperative Oncology Group (ECOG) status < 2, progression-free survival (PFS), disease control rate (DCR), and adverse events.

RESULTS

Seventy-eight patients were randomly allocated (40 to chemotherapy and 38 to sonochemotherapy). The median OS was longer with sonochemotherapy than with chemotherapy (9.10 vs. 6.10 months; p = 0.037). The median PFS with sonochemotherapy was 5.50 months, compared with 3.50 months (p = 0.080) for chemotherapy. The time of ECOG status < 2 was longer with sonochemotherapy (7.20 months) than with chemotherapy (5.00 months; p = 0.029). The DCR was 73.68% for sonochemotherapy compared with 42.50% for the control (p = 0.005). The incidence of overall adverse events was balanced between the two groups.

CONCLUSIONS

The use of sonochemotherapy can extend the survival and well-being time of stage III or IV pancreatic cancer patients without any increase in serious adverse events.

TRIAL REGISTRATION

ChineseClinicalTrials.gov ChiCTR2100044721 CLINICAL RELEVANCE STATEMENT: This multicentre, randomised, controlled trial has proven that sonochemotherapy, namely, the combination of diagnostic ultrasound, microbubbles, and chemotherapy, could extend the overall survival of patients with end-stage pancreatic ductal adenocarcinoma from 6.10 to 9.10 months without increasing any serious adverse events.

KEY POINTS

• This is the first multicentre, randomised, controlled trial of sonochemotherapy for clinical pancreatic cancer treatment using ultrasound and a commercial ultrasound contrast agent. • Sonochemotherapy extended the median overall survival from 6.10 (chemotherapy alone) to 9.10 months. • The disease control rate increased from 42.50% with chemotherapy to 73.68% with sonochemotherapy.

Gynaecological Causes of Acute Pelvic Pain: Common and Not-So-Common Imaging Findings

In female patients, acute pelvic pain can be caused by gynaecological, gastrointestinal, and urinary tract pathologies. Due to the variety of diagnostic possibilities, the correct assessment of these patients may be challenging. The most frequent gynaecological causes of acute pelvic pain in non-pregnant women are pelvic inflammatory disease, ruptured ovarian cysts, ovarian torsion, and degeneration or torsion of uterine leiomyomas. On the other hand, spontaneous abortion, ectopic pregnancy, and placental disorders are the most frequent gynaecological entities to cause acute pelvic pain in pregnant patients. Ultrasound (US) is usually the first-line diagnostic technique because of its sensitivity across most common aetiologies and its lack of radiation exposure. Computed tomography (CT) may be performed if ultrasound findings are equivocal or if a gynaecologic disease is not initially suspected. Magnetic resonance imaging (MRI) is an extremely useful second-line technique for further characterisation after US or CT. This pictorial review aims to review the spectrum of gynaecological entities that may manifest as acute pelvic pain in the emergency department and to describe the imaging findings of these gynaecological conditions obtained with different imaging techniques.

Imaging of Acute Abdominopelvic Pain in Pregnancy and Puerperium-Part II: Non-Obstetric Complications

Emergency imaging in pregnancy and puerperium poses unique challenges both for clinicians and radiologists, requiring timely and accurate diagnosis. Delay in treatment may result in poor outcomes for both the patient and the foetus. Pregnant and puerperal patients may present in the emergency setting with acute abdominopelvic pain for various complications that can be broadly classified into obstetric and non-obstetric related diseases. Ultrasonography (US) is the primary diagnostic imaging test; however, it may be limited due to the patient's body habitus and the overlapping of bowel loops. Computed tomography (CT) carries exposure to ionising radiation to the foetus, but may be necessary in selected cases. Magnetic resonance imaging (MRI) is a valuable complement to US in the determination of the etiology of acute abdominal pain and can be used in most settings, allowing for the identification of a broad spectrum of pathologies with a limited protocol of sequences. In this second section, we review the common non-obstetric causes for acute abdominopelvic pain in pregnancy and post partum, offering a practical approach for diagnosis and pointing out the role of imaging methods (US, MRI, CT) with the respective imaging findings.

Imaging of Acute Abdominopelvic Pain in Pregnancy and Puerperium-Part I: Obstetric (Non-Fetal) Complications

Acute abdominopelvic pain in pregnant and postpartum patients presents clinical and therapeutic challenges, often requiring quick and accurate imaging diagnosis. Ultrasound remains the primary imaging investigation. Magnetic resonance imaging (MRI) has been shown to be a powerful diagnostic tool in the setting of acute abdominal pain during pregnancy and puerperium. MRI overcomes some drawbacks of US, avoiding the ionizing radiation exposure of a computed tomography (CT) scan. Although CT is not usually appropriate in pregnant patients, it is crucial in the emergency evaluation of postpartum complications. The aim of this article is to provide radiologists with a thorough familiarity with the common and uncommon pregnancy and puerperium abdominal emergencies by illustrating their imaging appearances. The present first section will review and discuss the imaging findings for acute abdominopelvic pain of obstetric (non-fetal) etiology.

Acute Abdomen in Pregnancy: A Comprehensive Review of Diagnosis and Management

An unusual diagnostic and treatment challenge is presented by an acute abdomen during pregnancy. Obstetric factors and other causes unrelated to pregnancy also contribute to acute abdominal discomfort in pregnancy. Due to the changing clinical presentations brought on by the anatomical and physiological changes of pregnancy as well as the hesitation to utilize certain radiological studies out of concern about damaging the fetus, the diagnosis of the acute abdomen during pregnancy can be challenging. Delays in identification and treatment may have negative effects on the mother as well as the fetus. This review sheds light on the importance of anatomical and physiological considerations, early diagnoses, and understanding the various modalities and etiologies of acute abdomen in pregnancy (AAP). We then move on to discuss the various diagnostic techniques that can help the physician determine the causes and plan well-informed treatment. We examine and contrast different radiographic tests, including X-rays, computed tomography, magnetic resonance imaging, and ultrasound. We also talk about the various roles that these investigational methods can play in the evaluation and treatment throughout the duration of the pregnancy. The paper additionally addresses how to handle patients who appear with AAP and the different techniques used to treat them, including pre-operative laparoscopy. Before going over some more broad points that might be useful, we eventually dive into some of the more intriguing etiologies relating to AAP, such as isolated tubal torsion and neoplastic complications.

Spontaneous hemoperitoneum in pregnancy: Italian prospective population-based cohort study

INTRODUCTION

Spontaneous hemoperitoneum in pregnancy is defined as a sudden non-traumatic intraperitoneal bleeding in pregnancy and up to 42 days postpartum. In the present study we aim to estimate the incidence and investigate the risk factors, the management and the outcomes of spontaneous hemoperitoneum in pregnancy in order to improve its clinical identification and reduce avoidable maternal deaths.

MATERIAL AND METHODS

This is a prospective population-based cohort study, set in maternity units from nine Italian regions covering 75% of the national births. The study population comprises all women admitted for spontaneous intraperitoneal hemorrhage during pregnancy and up to 42 days postpartum between November 2017 and March 2020. Incident cases were reported by trained clinicians through electronic data collection forms. Descriptive statistics were performed. The main outcome measures included incidence rate of spontaneous hemoperitoneum in pregnancy, association with potential risk factors, clinical management and maternal and perinatal outcomes.

RESULTS

Twenty-nine cases met the adopted definition of spontaneous hemoperitoneum in pregnancy with an estimated incidence rate of 0.04 per 1000 births. An increased risk ratio (RR) of this condition was observed in pregnancies conceived by assisted reproductive technology (RR = 6.60, 95% CI 2.52-17.29), in the case of multiple pregnancies (RR = 6.57, 95% CI 1.99-21.69) and maternal age ≥35 years (RR 2.10, 95% CI 1.01-4.35). In 17/29 cases the bleeding site was intra-pelvic (23.5% in the posterior uterine wall and 35.2% in the left hemipelvis). Laparotomy represented the surgical treatment in 27 cases (93%), and most women underwent a cesarean delivery (92.6%). Median blood loss was 1900 mL, one hysterectomy was necessary, and two women died. Twenty-two preterm births were recorded.

CONCLUSIONS

Spontaneous hemoperitoneum in pregnancy is a rare, life-threatening condition associated with high perinatal morbidity and mortality. Maternal age ≥35 years, multiple pregnancies and assisted reproductive technology were associated to a higher risk of the condition. Two women of 29 died and 70% of births occurred preterm.

MR imaging of acute abdominal pain in pregnancy

Abdominal pain in pregnancy is a diagnostic challenge with many potential aetiologies. Diagnostic imaging is a valuable tool in the assessment of these patients, with ultrasound commonly employed first line. MRI is an excellent problem-solving adjunct to ultrasound and has many advantages in terms of improved spatial resolution and soft tissue characterisation. This pictorial review aims to outline the role of MRI in the work up of acute abdominal pain in pregnancy and provide imaging examples of pathologies which may be encountered.

Using MRI to differentiate upper-lateral intracavitary pregnancy and interstitial pregnancy for the patients with pregnancies in the uterotubal junction during the first trimester

Objectives

To retrospectively evaluate the diagnostic value of MRI for the uterotubal junctional pregnancies during the first trimester.

Methods

This retrospective study involved 59 patients (January 2016 to July 2021) with a preoperative imaging diagnosis of uterotubal junctional pregnancy. Using operative and pathological reports as the reference standard, we identified 22 patients with upper-lateral intracavitary (angular) pregnancy and 37 patients with interstitial pregnancy. Two senior radiologists, blinded to the patients’ information, reviewed the MRI images and determined each MRI feature based on the original interpretation criteria. Any disagreement was resolved by discussion to achieve a consensus. The sensitivity and specificity of each MRI feature were calculated according to the reference standard.

Results

The endometrial thickness in the upper-lateral intracavitary pregnancy group was larger than in the interstitial group (p = 0.001). The cutoff value of the endometrial thickness was 11.5 mm with a sensitivity, specificity, and area under the curve that were 77.3%, 64.9%, and 0.743, respectively. Two key features to diagnose upper-lateral intracavitary pregnancy were “medial free edge” and “medial free edge plus above-cutoff endometrial thickness.” The sensitivity and specificity of the medial free edge were 100% and 94.9%, respectively. The sensitivity and specificity of the medial free edge plus above-cutoff endometrial thickness were 77.3% and 100%, respectively. The key feature to diagnose interstitial pregnancy was an “intact lateral junctional zone,” of which the sensitivity and specificity were 94.6% and 100%, respectively.

Conclusions

MRI can be used to differentiate the upper-lateral intracavitary pregnancy and interstitial pregnancy during the first trimester.

Key Points

• We demonstrated MRI diagnostic criteria for the interstitial pregnancy and upper-lateral intracavitary pregnancy.

• MRI might be used to identify the complex interstitial pregnancies, those with a gestational sac protruding into the uterine cavity.

Role of Ultrasound in the Assessment and Differential Diagnosis of Pelvic Pain in Pregnancy

Pelvic pain (PP) is common in pregnant women and can be caused by several diseases, including obstetrics, gynaecological, gastrointestinal, genitourinary, and vascular disorders. Timely and accurate diagnosis as well as prompt treatment are crucial for the well-being of the mother and foetus. However, these are very challenging. It should be considered that the physiological changes occurring during pregnancy may confuse the diagnosis. In this setting, ultrasound (US) represents the first-line imaging technique since it is readily and widely available and does not use ionizing radiations. In some cases, US may be conclusive for the diagnosis (e.g., if it detects no foetal cardiac activity in suspected spontaneous abortion; if it shows an extrauterine gestational sac in suspected ectopic pregnancy; or if it reveals a dilated, aperistaltic, and blind-ending tubular structure arising from the cecum in suspicious of acute appendicitis). Magnetic resonance imaging (MRI), overcoming some limits of US, represents the second-line imaging technique when an US is negative or inconclusive, to detect the cause of bowel obstruction, or to characterize adnexal masses.

Imaging of acute pelvic pain

Acute pelvic pain (APP) requires urgent medical evaluation and treatment. Differential diagnosis of APP is broad, including a variety of gynecologic and non-gynecologic/ urinary, gastrointestinal, vascular and other entities. Close anatomical and physiological relations of pelvic structures, together with similar clinical presentation of different disorders and overlapping of symptoms, especially in the emergency background, make the proper diagnosis of APP challenging. Imaging plays a crucial role in the fast and precise diagnosis of APP. Ultrasonography is the first-line imaging modality, often accompanied by CT, while MRI is utilized in specific cases, using short, tailored protocols. Recognizing the cause of APP in females is a challenging task, due to the wide spectrum of possible origin and overlap of their imaging features. Therefore, the radiologist has to be familiar with the possible causes of APP, and, relying on clinical presentation, together with laboratory findings, choose the best imaging strategy in order to establish a fast and accurate diagnosis.

Management of ureteric stone in pregnancy: a review

Background

Urolithiasis in pregnancy is a major health concern and is one of the most common causes for non-obstetrical abdominal pain and subsequent hospital admission during pregnancy. The incidence of urinary calculi during pregnancy varies in the range of 1/200 to 1/2000. Acute ureteric colic in pregnancy is associated with significant potential risks to both mother and fetus. Significant anatomic and functional changes occur in pregnancy which not only lead to stone formation but also create diagnostic dilemma. The diagnosis of ureteric calculi can be incorrect in about 28% of pregnant patients.

Main body

Management of ureteric stone during pregnancy is remaining to be a challenge for the treating urologist. Because of the inability to use good imaging options for the diagnosis confirmation and more invasive approach for the treatment, management continues to be difficult. The main threats are preterm labor with delivery and premature rupture of membranes. Other pregnancy complications are obstructive uropathy, gestational diabetes mellitus, recurrent abortions and pre-eclampsia. Management of diagnosed ureteric stone is unique in the pregnant population and requires multi-disciplinary care. It should be individualized for each patient and moves preferably from conservative to invasive approaches sequentially. With continued advancements in endourological techniques, few definitive treatment options are also available for such patients.

Conclusion

There are several lacunae related with the diagnostic imaging, medical expulsive therapy, reliability of ureteral stent/percutaneous nephrostomy insertions and safety of ureteroscopy during pregnancy. Herein, we review the management of ureteric stone during pregnancy, the various diagnostic modalities and treatment options with their advantages and disadvantages. We also proposed our management algorithm to deal with such clinical scenario in this particular population.

Noncontrast MRI of acute abdominal pain caused by gastrointestinal lesions: indications, protocol, and image interpretation

Gastrointestinal tract lesions are major causes of acute abdominal pain. A rapid, accurate, and reliable diagnosis is required to manage patients. Magnetic resonance imaging (MRI) is a nonionizing modality that is beneficial for pregnant women, children, and young adults who are sensitive to ionizing radiation. For patients with renal impairment who are not accurately diagnosed with noncontrast computed tomography, noncontrast MRI can serve as an alternative diagnostic modality. MRI protocols used for acute abdominal pain are supposed to be optimized and prioritized to shorten scanning times. Single-shot T2-weighted and fat-suppressed T2-weighted imaging are important pulse sequences that are used to reveal pathology and inflammation in the gastrointestinal tract. Diffusion-weighted imaging clearly depicts inflammation and abscesses as hyperintense lesions. Most acute gastrointestinal tract lesions, including inflammation, ischemia, obstruction, and perforation, demonstrate bowel wall thickening. Bowel obstruction and adynamic ileus present bowel dilatation, and perforation and penetration show bowel wall defects. MRI can be used to reveal these pathological findings with some characteristics depending on their underlying pathophysiology. This review article discusses imaging modalities for acute abdominal pain, describes a noncontrast MRI protocol for acute abdominal pain caused by gastrointestinal tract lesions, and reviews MRI findings of acute gastrointestinal tract lesions.

Body mass index as an indicator of the likelihood of ultrasound visualization of the appendix in pregnant women with suspicion of appendicitis

PURPOSE

To determine if clinical characteristics of pregnant women are associated with the likelihood of ultrasound (US) visualization of the appendix in cases where there is a clinical suspicion of appendicitis.

MATERIALS AND METHODS

A retrospective study of 471 pregnant patients with suspicion of appendicitis from 2009 to 2018 were studied. Patients underwent sonography of the appendix as their initial imaging study. The association of body mass index (BMI) and gestational age with sonographic visualization of the appendix was analyzed using logistic regression. Cut-off values were determined for BMI to predict visualization of the appendix.

RESULTS

The rate of visualization of the appendix on US was 16% (95% CI 12% to 19%). When stratified by trimester of pregnancy, rebound pain on compression US examination in the 1st trimester and BMI in the 2nd and 3rd trimesters were identified as predictors of US visualization. Applying BMI cut-off values rounded to the nearest whole number, 36, 30, and 26 in the 1st, 2nd, and 3rd trimesters, non-visualization rates would be reduced by 16% (95% CI 10% to 25%), 35% (95% CI 29% to 42%), and 67% (95% CI 58% to 74%). Using BMI index cut-off values would reduce the number of primary US examinations by 35% (95% CI 30% to 39%) and increase the rate of visualization by 6% (95% CI 0.02% to 12%, P = 0.04).

CONCLUSION

Using BMI cut-off values for determining the efficaciousness of US visualization of the appendix in pregnant women with suspicion of appendicitis could significantly reduce the non-visualization rate.

Optimization of pulse sequences in ultrafast magnetic resonance imaging for the diagnosis of acute abdominal pain caused by gastrointestinal disease

Background

Magnetic resonance imaging (MRI) is widely used to diagnose acute abdominal pain; however, it remains unclear which pulse sequence has priority in acute abdominal pain.

Purpose

To investigate the diagnostic accuracy of MRI and to assess the conspicuity of each pulse sequence for the diagnosis of acute abdominal pain due to gastrointestinal diseases

Material and Methods

We retrospectively enrolled 60 patients with acute abdominal pain who underwent MRI for axial and coronal T2-weighted (T2W) imaging, fat-suppressed (FS)-T2W imaging, and true-fast imaging with steady-state precession (True-FISP) and axial T1-weighted (T1W) imaging and investigated the diagnosis with endoscopy, surgery, histopathology, computed tomography, and clinical follow-up as standard references. Two radiologists determined the diagnosis with MRI and rated scores of the respective sequences in assessing intraluminal, intramural, and extramural abnormality using a 5-point scale after one month. Diagnostic accuracy was calculated and scores were compared by Wilcoxon-signed rank test with Bonferroni correction.

Results

Diagnostic accuracy was 90.0% and 93.3% for readers 1 and 2, respectively. Regarding intraluminal abnormality, T2W, FS-T2W, and True-FISP imaging were superior to T1W imaging in both readers. FS-T2W imaging was superior to True-FISP in reader 2 (P < 0.0083). For intramural findings, there was no significant difference in reader 1, whereas T2W, FS-T2W, and True-FISP imaging were superior to T1W imaging in reader 2 (P < 0.0083). For extramural findings, FS-T2W imaging was superior to T2W, T1W, and True-FISP imaging in both readers (P < 0.0083).

Conclusion

T2W and FS-T2W imaging are pivotal pulse sequences and should be obtained before T1W and True-FISP imaging.

MR Imaging-based Evaluation of Mesenteric Ischemia Caused by Strangulated Small Bowel Obstruction and Mesenteric Venous Occlusion: An Experimental Study Using Rabbits

PURPOSE

This study assessed the MRI findings of strangulated small bowel obstruction (SBO) and mesenteric venous occlusion (MVO) in a rabbit model using 3T MRI.

MATERIALS AND METHODS

Twenty rabbits were included in this study. The strangulated SBO and MVO models were generated via surgical procedures in nine rabbits, and sham surgery was performed in two rabbits. The success of generating the models was confirmed via angiographic, macroscopic, and microscopic findings after the surgical procedure. MRI was performed before and 30 min after inducing mesenteric ischemia. T₁-weighted images (T₁WIs), T₂-weighted images (T₂WIs), and fat-suppressed T₂WIs (FS-T₂WIs) were obtained using the BLADE technique, and fat-suppressed T₁WIs (FS-T₁WIs) were obtained. The signal intensities of the affected bowel before and after the surgical procedures were visually categorized as high, iso, and low intense compared with the findings for the normal bowel wall on all sequences. Bowel wall thickness was measured, and the signal intensity ratio (SI ratio) was calculated using the signal intensities of the bowel wall and psoas muscle.

RESULTS

Angiographic, macroscopic, and microscopic findings confirmed that all surgical procedures were successful. The ischemic bowel wall was thicker than the normal bowel. The bowel wall was thicker in the MVO model (3.17 ± 0.55 mm) than in the strangulated SBO model (2.26 ± 0.46 mm). The signal intensity and SI ratio of the bowel wall were significantly higher after the procedure than before the procedure on all sequences in both models. The mesentery adjacent to the ischemic bowel loop exhibited a high signal intensity in all animals on FS-T₂WIs.

CONCLUSION

Non-contrast MRI can be used to evaluate mesenteric ischemia caused by strangulated SBO and MVO. FS-T₂WIs represented the best modality for depicting the high signal intensity in the bowel wall and mesentery caused by ischemia.

Laparoscopic surgery for non-obstetric acute abdomen in pregnancy: A retrospective case series review

BACKGROUND

Laparoscopic techniques have been used during pregnancy by obstetricians since the 1970's, primarily to diagnose and treat ectopic and heterotopic pregnancies. Pregnancy was considered as an absolute contraindication to laparoscopy by surgeons as recently as 1991, and a few still doubt the safety of minimal access in gravid patients. When an emergent operation is indicated, the surgery should not be withheld on the sole basis of patient's gravid state. On the contrary, the alleviation of maternal disease is thought to take priority because the health of the foetus is dependant on the mother.

MATERIALS AND METHODS

This is a retrospective study of a case series of 18 obstetric patients who presented with non-obstetric causes of acute abdomen requiring surgical intervention. Ultrasonography and magnetic resonance imaging (MRI) along with other laboratory investigations were carried out to reach the diagnosis. Laparoscopic surgery was considered as the modality of treatment. All the patients were given the necessary care post-surgery and were followed up till parturition to look for any complications.

RESULTS

The data were analysed considering the presentation, diagnostic variations and the surgical modifications statistically.

CONCLUSION

The decision of surgery should be prompt and should be weighed against complications of conserving the patient. Due to the diagnostic limitations of ultrasonography, MRI should be coupled to confirm the diagnosis. Laparoscopy offers less analgesic requirements and shorter hospital stay. The operative time is highly subjective to the experience and training of the surgeon and the laparoscopic set-up itself.

MRI of Acute Gynecologic Conditions

Although usually not a first-line imaging modality in the setting of acute pelvic pain, magnetic resonance imaging (MRI) is able to depict and characterize a wide range gynecologic diagnoses with high accuracy. Lack of ionizing radiation renders MRI particularly useful for assessment of pregnant women and children. Furthermore, inherent high soft-tissue resolution of MRI allows accurate diagnosis without intravenous contrast use, which is advantageous for patients with renal insufficiency and pregnant patients. Familiarity with the typical MRI appearance of various acute gynecologic conditions helps establish the correct diagnosis. This article reviews the common MRI findings of acute gynecologic processes, in both pregnant and nonpregnant patients. Level of Evidence: 3 Technical Efficacy Stage: 3 J. Magn. Reson. Imaging 2020;51:1291-1309.

Pregnancy and appendicitis: a systematic review and meta-analysis on the clinical use of MRI in diagnosis of appendicitis in pregnant women

Background

The aim of this systematic review and meta-analysis was to evaluate the clinical use of MRI for the evaluation of acute appendicitis during pregnancy.

Methods

The searches were conducted by two independent researchers (MK, MS) to find the relevant studies published from 1/1/2009 until end of 30/12/2018. We searched for published literature in the English language in MEDLINE via PubMed, EMBASETM via Ovid, The Cochrane Library, and Trip database. For literature published in other languages, we searched national databases (Magiran and SID), KoreaMed, and LILACS. The keywords used in the search strategy are Pregnancy [MeSH], Pregnant [MeSH] OR-Magnetic resonance imaging [MeSH] OR-Appendicitis [MeSH] OR-Ultrasound, [MeSH] OR, imaging, MRI [MeSH] OR"،" and Right lower quadrant pain [MeSH]. The risk of bias of every article was evaluated by using QUADAS-2. On the basis of the results from the 2 × 2 tables, pooled measures for sensitivity, specificity, diagnostic odds ratio (DOR), and area under the curves (AUC) along with their 95% confidence intervals (CIs) were calculated using the DerSimonian Lair methodology.

Results

As many as 1164 studies were selected. After analyzing the correspondence of the studies with the required criteria, 19 studies were selected for the final review. For appendicitis in pregnancy, the MRI sensitivity was 91.8% at the 95% confidence interval of (95% CI 87.7-94.9%). At the confidence interval of 95%, the specificity was 97.9% (95% CI 0.97.2-100%). The risk of bias in the studies conducted was measured using the QUADAS-2 tool.

Conclusion

MRI has high sensitivity and specificity (91.8%, 97.9% respectively) for the diagnosis of acute appendicitis in pregnant patients with clinically suspected appendicitis. It is an excellent imaging technique in many instances, which does not expose a fetus, or the mother, to ionizing radiation, making it an excellent option for pregnant patients with suspected acute appendicitis.

MRI in pregnancy: Indications and practical considerations

There is a constantly evolving knowledgebase regarding the safety of MRI in pregnant patients, as well as the safety of gadolinium administration, given potential fetal risks. This review provides an overview of national and international recommendations for patient screening and safety by trimester, evaluates the most recent literature regarding administration of gadolinium in pregnant patients, and discusses technical requirements when imaging pregnant patients. A protocol for imaging pregnant patients is provided, and multiple common indications for MRI in pregnancy are discussed. Level of Evidence 5. Technical Efficacy Stage 5. J. Magn. Reson. Imaging 2019;49:621-631.

The Role of Bowel Ultrasound in Detecting Subclinical Inflammation in Pregnant Women with Crohn's Disease

Background and Aims

Maintaining disease remission improves outcomes for pregnant women with Crohn’s disease (CD). As symptoms may correlate poorly with disease activity in the gravid state, we investigated the utility of bowel sonography during pregnancy to assess disease activity.

Methods

We conducted a prospective observational cohort study of pregnant women with CD undergoing bowel sonography between July 1, 2012, and December 1, 2016. Clinically active disease was defined using standardized clinical indices (Harvey Bradshaw Index >4 for active disease). Sonographic findings were graded as inactive (normal, mild) or active (moderate, severe) by expert radiologists.

Results

There were 91 pregnancies in 82 CD patients. Symptoms were present in 12 pregnancies; however, eight (67%) had sonographic findings of inactive disease, and escalation of therapy was not initiated. Conversely, sonographically active disease in seven asymptomatic pregnancies resulted in four women escalating therapy. The remaining three women declined escalation of therapy, one had a miscarriage, and the other two women had persistently active disease on sonography and endoscopy at one-year postpartum.

Conclusions

Bowel ultrasound may detect subclinical inflammation in asymptomatic pregnant women with CD and stratify CD activity in symptomatic patients. Therefore, bowel sonography should be considered as a useful adjunct for the assessment of the pregnant woman with Crohn’s disease.

Suspicion of appendicitis in pregnant women: emergency evaluation by sonography and low-dose CT with oral contrast

OBJECTIVES

To evaluate non-intravenously enhanced low-dose computed tomography with oral contrast (LDCT) for the assessment of pregnant women with right lower quadrant pain, when magnetic resonance imaging (MRI) is not immediately available.

METHODS

One hundred and thirty-eight consecutive pregnant women with acute abdominal pain were admitted in our emergency centre. Thirty-seven (27%) of them, with clinical suspicion of acute appendicitis, underwent abdominal ultrasonography (US). No further examination was recommended when US was positive for appendicitis, negative with low clinical suspicion or showed an alternative diagnosis which explained the clinical presentation. All other patients underwent LDCT (<2.5 mSv). Standard intravenously enhanced CT or MRI was performed when LDCT was indeterminate.

RESULTS

Eight (22%) of 37 US exams were reported normal, 25 (67%) indeterminate, 1 (3%) positive for appendicitis, 3 (8%) positive for an alternative diagnosis. LDCT was obtained in 29 (78%) patients. It was reported positive for appendicitis in 9 (31%), for alternative diagnosis in 2 (7%), normal in 13 (45%) and indeterminate in 5 (17%). Further imaging (standard CT or MRI) showed appendicitis in 2 of these 5 patients, was truly negative in 1, indeterminate in 1 and falsely positive in 1. An appendicitis was confirmed at surgery in 12 (32%) of the 37 patients. The sensitivity and the specificity of the algorithm for appendicitis were 100% (12/12) and 92% (23/25), respectively.

CONCLUSIONS

The proposed algorithm is very sensitive and specific for detection of acute appendicitis in pregnant women; it reduces the need of standard CTs when MRI is not available as second-line imaging.

KEY POINTS

• In pregnant women, US is limited by an important number of indeterminate results • Low-dose CT can be used after an inconclusive US for the diagnosis of appendicitis in pregnant women • An algorithm integrating US and low-dose CT is highly sensitive and specific for appendicitis in pregnant women.

To evaluate the feasibility of magnetic resonance imaging in predicting unusual site ectopic pregnancy: a retrospective cohort study

OBJECTIVE

To evaluate the accuracy of pelvic MRI in the diagnosis of unusual ectopic pregnancy (EP), when ultrasound (US) examination is inconclusive.

METHODS

We retrospectively reviewed the medical records of 150 patients with suspected EP. Clinical, US and MRI features of 15 unusual EPs were analysed. Two radiologists independently reviewed each case resolving by consensus any diagnostic discrepancy. Interobserver agreement was assessed using the Cohen κ test.

RESULTS

MRI displayed a gestational sac-like structure surrounded by a thick wall in all cases. The thick wall displayed hyperintensity in 41 %, isointensity in 35 % and hypointensity in 24 % of cases on T1-weighted images. Diffusion- and fat saturation T1-weighted images were the most accurate sequences, as they enabled identification of 15/15 and 14/15 patients, respectively. Although US was false negative in detecting cervical and uterine infiltration underlying the caesarean scar, MRI was able to identify the invasion. Interobserver agreement was very good for all sequences (κ=0.892-1.0).

CONCLUSIONS

MRI plays an important role in the early diagnosis of unusual EP. It should be considered after negative US findings, providing accurate evaluation of the site and the possible infiltration of these lesions, which help in the management of these patients.

KEY POINTS

• MRI is being increasingly used as a problem-solving modality in ectopic pregnancy. • MRI plays an important role in early diagnosis of unusual ectopic pregnancy. • Knowledge of MRI features in EP is essential to determinate appropriate management.

Uterine rupture in a primigravid patient, an uncommon but severe obstetrical event: a case report

BACKGROUND

A spontaneous rupture of the unscarred uterus in a primigravid patient is extremely rare and is associated with high perinatal and maternal morbidity and mortality.

CASE PRESENTATION

A 34-year-old white primigravid woman, 31 + 3 weeks of gestation, presented with pre-eclampsia and developed a sudden acute abdomen. An emergency laparotomy was performed and a uterine rupture was found as the cause of the event. A stillborn girl was born.

CONCLUSION

A rupture of the pregnant uterus should always be considered in a pregnant woman presenting with abdominal pain, even in a primigravid patient.

Acute Appendicitis in Pregnancy and the Developing World

Background

Acute appendicitis is the commonest nonobstetric surgical emergency during pregnancy. The aim of the study was to compare perioperative outcomes of acute appendicitis in pregnant and nonpregnant patients.

Methods

A retrospective review of medical records of 56 pregnant patients between 2011 and 2016 who were compared with 164 nonpregnant women of reproductive age who underwent open appendectomy between 2014 and 2016 for acute appendicitis. The patient's demographics and perioperative data were analyzed.

Results

The median age of pregnant and nonpregnant patients observed was 26 years (range 19–37) and 26 years (range 18–43). There were no significant differences between the groups in negative appendectomy (21.4 and 21.3%, P = 0.52), perforated appendicitis (25 and 23.8%, P = 0.85), postoperative complications (28.6 and 26.8%, P = 0.80), and median length of hospital stay (5 and 4.5 days, P = 0.36). There were 3.6% preterm labour, no maternal mortality, and no fetal loss. In multivariate analysis, WBC >18000/mm³ and long patient time to surgery were independent risk factors for appendicular perforation and postoperative complication (P < 0.05).

Conclusion

Our results of appendectomy in pregnant patients are comparable with nonpregnant patients. Hence the same perioperative treatment protocol can be followed in pregnant and nonpregnant patients even in resource-poor setting.

Utility of Magnetic Resonance Imaging for the Diagnosis of Appendicitis During Pregnancy: A Canadian Experience

PURPOSE

The objective of the study was to evaluate the performance of magnetic resonance imaging (MRI) for the diagnosis of appendicitis during pregnancy.

METHODS

We conducted a retrospective review of all MRI scans performed at our institution, between 2006 and 2012, for the evaluation of suspected appendicitis in pregnant women. Details of the MRI scans performed were obtained from the radiology information system as well as details of any ultrasounds carried out for the same indication. Clinical and pathological data were obtained by retrospective chart review.

RESULTS

The study population comprised 63 patients, and 8 patients underwent a second MRI scan during the same pregnancy. A total of 71 MRI scans were reviewed. The appendix was identified on 40 scans (56.3%). Sensitivity of MRI was 75% and specificity was 100% for the diagnosis of appendicitis in pregnant women. When cases with right lower quadrant inflammatory fat stranding or focal fluid, without appendix visualization, were classified as positive for appendicitis, MRI sensitivity increased to 81.3% but specificity decreased to 96.4%.

CONCLUSIONS

MRI is sensitive and highly specific for the diagnosis of appendicitis during pregnancy and should be considered as a first line imaging study for this clinical presentation.

Clinical use of MRI for the evaluation of acute appendicitis during pregnancy

PURPOSE

The purpose of this study was to determine the diagnostic accuracy of MRI for detecting acute appendicitis in pregnancy in a multi-institution study involving general body MR readers with no specific expertise in MR imaging of the pregnant patient.

METHODS

Retrospective review of MRI examinations on PACS in 42 pregnant patients was evaluated for acute right lower quadrant pain. Three fellowship-trained general body radiologists analyzed the MRI examinations in consensus and attempted to localize the appendix, assess for features of appendicitis, and exclude alternative etiologies for the right lower quadrant pain.

RESULTS

Of the 42 MRI examinations, the readers noted 6 cases of acute appendicitis, 16 cases of a normal appendix, and 20 cases involving non-visualization of the appendix but where there were no secondary features of acute appendicitis. Based on the surgical data and clinical follow-up, there were 3 true-positive cases, 3 false-positive cases, 34 true-negative cases, and 2 false-negative cases of acute appendicitis on MRI. This yielded an accuracy of 88.1%, sensitivity of 60%, specificity of 91.9%, positive predictive value of 50%, and negative predictive value of 94.4% for the detection of acute appendicitis in the pregnant patient on MRI. Alternative etiologies for the right lower quadrant pain on MRI included torsion of an ovarian dermoid in 1 case and pyelonephritis in 1 case.

CONCLUSION

MRI is an excellent modality for excluding acute appendicitis in pregnant patients presenting with right lower quadrant pain.

Surgical management of complicated and medically refractory inflammatory bowel disease during pregnancy

AIM

The medical management of inflammatory bowel disease (IBD) in pregnancy and the puerperium is well defined. Data on surgical management of complicated IBD in this setting are lacking. This study aimed to determine the optimal surgical strategy for medically refractory IBD during pregnancy and the puerperium.

METHOD

Three databases were systematically reviewed to identify all published series or case reports of women undergoing surgery for Crohn's disease (CD) or ulcerative colitis (UC) while pregnant or during the puerperium.

RESULTS

Thirty-two papers were identified, including 86 patients. Nearly one-fifth (18%) of cases were de novo presentations and intervention was required at all stages of pregnancy. UC refractory to medical treatment and perforated small bowel CD were the commonest indications for surgery. Operations used included colectomy, colectomy with mucous fistula and Turnbull-blowhole colostomy for complicated UC and open or laparoscopic small bowel resection with stoma formation for CD. Surgical intervention during the third trimester universally resulted in the onset of labour. Endoscopic and radiological interventions were rarely employed. In studies after 1980 there was no maternal or foetal mortality but there was an almost 50% preterm delivery rate.

CONCLUSION

Surgical management of complicated IBD during pregnancy and the puerperium needs to be tailored to disease severity, the type of complications and foetal status. It should involve gastroenterologists, colorectal surgeons, obstetricians and neonatal specialists in a multidisciplinary manner within a single unit.

T1 bright appendix sign to exclude acute appendicitis in pregnant women

OBJECTIVE

To evaluate the diagnostic value of the T1 bright appendix sign for the diagnosis of acute appendicitis in pregnant women.

MATERIAL AND METHODS

This retrospective study included 125 pregnant women with suspected appendicitis who underwent magnetic resonance (MR) imaging. The T1 bright appendix sign was defined as a high intensity signal filling more than half length of the appendix on T1-weighted imaging. Sensitivity, specificity, positive predictive value (PPV) and negative predictive value (NPV) of the T1 bright appendix sign for normal appendix identification were calculated in all patients and in those with borderline-sized appendices (6-7 mm).

RESULTS

The T1 bright appendix sign was seen in 51% of patients with normal appendices, but only in 4.5% of patients with acute appendicitis. The overall sensitivity, specificity, PPV, and NPV of the T1 bright appendix sign for normal appendix diagnosis were 44.9%, 95.5%, 97.6%, and 30.0%, respectively. All four patients with borderline sized appendix with appendicitis showed negative T1 bright appendix sign.

CONCLUSION

The T1 bright appendix sign is a specific finding for the diagnosis of a normal appendix in pregnant women with suspected acute appendicitis.

KEY POINTS

• Magnetic resonance imaging is increasingly used in emergency settings. • Acute appendicitis is the most common cause of acute abdomen. • Magnetic resonance imaging is widely used in pregnant population. • T1 bright appendix sign can be a specific sign representing normal appendix.

Errors in imaging the pregnant patient with acute abdomen

Pregnant women with an acute abdomen present a critical issue due to the necessity for an immediate diagnosis and treatment; in fact, a diagnostic delay could worsen the outcome for both the mother and the fetus. There is evidence that emergencies during pregnancy are subject to mismanagement; however, the percentage of errors in the diagnosis of emergencies in pregnancy has not been studied in depth. The purpose of this article is to review the most common imaging error emergencies. The topics covered are divided into gynecological and non-gynecological entities and, for each pathology, possible errors have been dealt with in the diagnostic pathway, the possible technical errors in the exam execution, and finally the possible errors in the interpretation of the images. These last two entities are often connected owing to a substandard examination, which can cause errors in the interpretation. Consequently, the systemization of errors reduces the possibility of reoccurrences in the future by providing a valid approach in helping to learn from these errors.

Adrenal infarction in a healthy pregnant woman

Adrenal infarction is a very rare event but occasionally seen in hypercoagulable states. We present a case of a 31-year-old woman at 38 weeks of gestation who developed a severe upper abdominal pain and unilateral adrenal infarction due to thrombosis of the adrenal vein. The only thrombogenic factor found was pregnancy. The case highlights that adrenal infarction may complicate a normal pregnancy and should be included in the differential diagnosis of the acute abdomen in pregnancy.

Advanced colorectal cancer resulting in acute bowel obstruction during pregnancy; a case report

Introduction

Abdominal pain is frequently found in the pregnant population; however life-threatening pathology such as colorectal cancer does occur rarely. As such, intestinal obstructions are usually attributed to pregnancy-related issues. We present the case of a young woman with an acute bowel obstruction caused by advanced colorectal carcinoma.

Presentation of Case

A 34-year old pregnant woman was referred to our emergency department with complaints of severe upper abdominal pain. Initial investigations did not show abdominal pathology and conservative treatment for obstipation was commenced. However, complaints persisted and a near blowout of the colon was diagnosed, prompting a caesarean section and diagnostic laparotomy. An obstructing tumour was found and a left-sided hemi-colectomy was performed. Unfortunately, skeletal, lymphatic and additional hepatogenic metastasis were discovered during chemotherapy and treatment was discontinued.

Discussion and conclusion

The mainstay of abdominal complaints during pregnancy can be attributed to normal physiological alterations associated with gravidity. Nonetheless serious pathology should be considered, especially when conservative treatment fails. On this note, diagnostic imaging during pregnancy should be used promptly upon suspicion of serious abdominal pathology.

•

Abdominal pain during gravidity is a commonly seen in the emergency room.

•

Even though the incidence is low, it may still be a sign of serious abdominal pathology.

•

Additional imaging is required when diagnosing acute abdominal pain during pregnancy.

•

Suspicion of serious abdominal pathology should arise when no progress is seen during conservative treatment.

•

If the diagnosis is made and the gestational age is sufficient, surgery should not be delayed.

Abdominal emergencies during pregnancy

Abdominal emergencies during pregnancy (excluding obstetrical emergencies) occur in one out of 500-700 pregnancies and may involve gastrointestinal, gynecologic, urologic, vascular and traumatic etiologies; surgery is necessary in 0.2-2% of cases. Since these emergencies are relatively rare, patients should be referred to specialized centers where surgical, obstetrical and neonatal cares are available, particularly because surgical intervention increases the risk of premature labor. Clinical presentations may be atypical and misleading because of pregnancy-associated anatomical and physiologic alterations, which often result in diagnostic uncertainty and therapeutic delay with increased risks of maternal and infant morbidity. The most common abdominal emergencies are acute appendicitis (best treated by laparoscopic appendectomy), acute calculous cholecystitis (best treated by laparoscopic cholecystectomy from the first trimester through the early part of the third trimester) and intestinal obstruction (where medical treatment is the first-line approach, just as in the non-pregnant patient). Acute pancreatitis is rare, usually resulting from trans-ampullary passage of gallstones; it usually resolves with medical treatment but an elevated risk of recurrent episodes justifies laparoscopic cholecystectomy in the 2nd trimester and endoscopic sphincterotomy in the 3rd trimester. The aim of the present work is to review pregnancy-induced anatomical and physiological modifications, to describe the main abdominal emergencies during pregnancy, their specific features and their diagnostic and therapeutic management.

Location of the appendix at the third trimester of pregnancy: A new approach to old dilemma

The aim of this study was to determine the location of the appendix at the third trimester of pregnancy as there are conflicting results in literature. Distances from the base of the appendix were measured intra-operatively to the anterior iliac spine (A), symphysis pubis (B) and the xyphoid process (C). The same measurements were taken from McBurney's point on the abdominal wall (A1, B1 and C1). In the allocated 21 pregnant and 18 non-pregnant women, distance A and B were 10.3 ± 0.9 cm and 18.3 ± 3.2 cm in pregnant and 6.7 ± 0.9 cm and 13.2 ± 0.9 cm in non-pregnant women (p < 0.001), respectively. Distance C was shorter in pregnant women (14.7 ± 2.5 cm vs. 23.8 ± 1.9, p < 0.001). Conversely, distance C1 was longer in pregnant women (30.3 ± 3.0 vs. 24.8 ± 5.1 cm, p = 0.004). This study provides evidence that the appendix moves cranially late in the course of the pregnancy. Therefore, McBurney's point cannot be used as a reference point to localise the appendix at the third trimester of pregnancy.

Stone disease in pregnancy: imaging-guided therapy

Renal colic is the most frequent nonobstetric cause for abdominal pain and subsequent hospitalization during pregnancy. The physio-anatomical changes in the urinary tract and the presence of the fetus may complicate the clinical presentation and management of nephrolithiasis. Ultrasound (US) is the primary radiological investigation of choice. Magnetic resonance urography (MRU) and low-dose computed tomography (CT) have to be considered as a second- and third-line test, respectively. If a study that uses ionizing radiation has to be performed, the radiation dose to the fetus should be as low as possible. The initial management of symptomatic ureteric stones is conservative during pregnancy. Intervention will be necessary in patients who do not respond to conservative measures. Therefore, it is crucial to obtain a prompt and accurate diagnosis to optimize the management of these patients. Teaching Points • In pregnancy, renal colic is the most frequent nonobstetric cause for abdominal pain and hospitalization. • Magnetic resonance urography should be considered when ultrasound is nondiagnostic. • Low-dose CT should be considered as a last-line test during pregnancy.

Imaging for acute pelvic pain in pregnancy

Acute pelvic pain in pregnancy presents diagnostic and therapeutic challenges. Standard imaging techniques need to be adapted to reduce harm to the foetus from X-rays because of their teratogenic and carcinogenic potential. Ultrasound remains the primary imaging investigation of the pregnant abdomen. Magnetic resonance imaging (MRI) has been shown to be useful in the diagnosis of gynaecological and obstetric problems during pregnancy and in the setting of acute abdomen during pregnancy. MRI overcomes some of the limitations of ultrasound, mainly the size of the gravid uterus. MRI poses theoretical risks to the foetus and care must be taken to minimise these with the avoidance of contrast agents. Teaching Points • Ultrasound and MRI are the preferred investigations for acute pelvic pain during pregnancy. • Ultrasound remains the primary imaging investigation because of availability and portability. • MRI helps differentiate causes of acute pelvic pain when ultrasound is inconclusive.