Ultrasound elastography of the lower uterine segment in women with a previous cesarean section: Comparison of in-/ex-vivo elastography versus tensile-stress-strain-rupture analysis.

OBJECTIVES

The purpose of this study was to assess, if the biomechanical properties of the lower uterine segment (LUS) in women with a previous cesarean section (CS) can be determined by ultrasound (US) elastography. The first aim was to establish an ex-vivo LUS tensile-stress-strain-rupture(break point) analysis with the possibility of simultaneously using US elastography. The second aim was to investigate the relationship between measurement results of LUS stiffness using US elastography in-/ex-vivo with results of tensile-stress-strain-rupture analysis, and to compare different US elastography LUS-stiffness-measurement methods ex-vivo.

STUDY DESIGN

An explorative experimental, in-/ex-vivo US study of women with previous CS was conducted. LUS elasticity was measured by point Shear Wave Elastography (pSWE) and bidimensional Shear-Wave-Elastography (2D-SWE) first in-vivo during preoperative examination within 24 h before repeat CS (including resection of the thinnest part of the LUS = uterine scar area during CS), second within 1 h after operation during the ex-vivo experiment, followed by tensile-stress-strain-rupture analysis. Pearson's correlation coefficient and scatter plots, Bland-Altman plots and paired T-tests, were used.

RESULTS

Thirty three women were included in the study; elastography measurements n = 1412. The feasibility of ex-vivo assessment of LUS by quantitative US elastography using pSWE and 2D-SWE to detect stiffness of LUS was demonstrated. The strongest correlation with tensile-stress-strain analysis was found in the US elastography examination carried out with 2D-SWE (0.78, p < 0.001, 95%CI [0.48, 0.92]). The laboratory experiment illustrated that, the break point - as a surrogate marker for the risk of rupture of the LUS after CS - is linearly dependent on the thickness of the LUS in the scar area (Coefficient of correlation: 0.79, p < 0.001, 95%CI [0.55, 0.91]). Two extremely stiff LUS-specimens (outlier or extreme values) rupture even at less stroke/strain than would be expected by their thickness.

CONCLUSION

This study confirms that US elastography can help in determining viscoelastic properties of the LUS in women with a previous CS. The data from our small series are promising. However whether individual extreme values of high stiffness and consecutive restricted biomechanical resilience can explain the phenomenon of rupture during TOLAC in cases of LUS with adequate thickness remains a question which prospective trials have to analyze before US elastography can be introduced into clinical practice.