Obstetric MR pelvimetry: reference values and evaluation of inter- and intraobserver error and intraindividual variability.

PURPOSE To establish obstetric magnetic resonance (MR) pelvimetric reference values in a large study population and stratify them according to delivery modality and to determine the intra- and interobserver error and intraindividual variability of MR pelvimetric assessment in volunteers. MATERIALS AND METHODS MR pelvimetric data were retrospectively reviewed in 781 women (mean age, 28.9 years +/- 5.2 [SD]) clinically referred, and the data were correlated to obstetric history to derive normative values. Five observers assessed results of multiple MR pelvimetric examinations in 10 female volunteers (mean age, 34.7 years +/- 6.0; eight nullipara, two primipara) to provide data for measurement error analysis. RESULTS All values were higher in the spontaneous vaginal delivery subgroup (n = 100) and lower in the cesarean section or vacuum extraction subgroup (n = 130; intersubgroup difference, P <.001, Mann-Whitney U test). Pelvimetric parameters in the group undergoing spontaneous vaginal delivery were as follows: obstetric conjugate, 121.7 mm +/- 8.6; interspinous distance, 112.3 mm +/- 7.9; intertuberous distance, 120.6 mm +/- 11.3; transverse diameter, 129.5 mm +/- 8.7; and sagittal outlet, 115.8 mm +/- 9.9. In the volunteer study, intraobserver, interobserver, and intraindividual reliabilities were high for the obstetric conjugate (0.94-0.96), interspinous distance (0.92-0.95), and transverse diameter (0.95-0.98) but low for intertuberous distance (0.64-0.87) and sagittal outlet (0.66-0.85). CONCLUSION Pelvimetric dimensions are smaller in women undergoing cesarean section or vacuum extraction than they are in those delivering vaginally. The pelvimetric parameters associated with the largest measurement errors are intertuberous distance and sagittal outlet.

[1]  J. Russell MOULDING OF THE PELVIC OUTLET , 1969, The Journal of obstetrics and gynaecology of the British Commonwealth.

[2]  N. Holmberg,et al.  THE ASSIMILATION PELVIS—A RADIOLOGICAL AND OBSTETRICAL STUDY , 1968, Acta obstetricia et gynecologica Scandinavica.

[3]  M. Georgi,et al.  Geburtshilfliche Beckenvermessung mit der digitalen Bildverstärkerradiographie , 1989 .

[4]  V. Poutanen,et al.  Fetal shoulder measurements by fast and ultrafast MRI techniques , 2001, Journal of magnetic resonance imaging : JMRI.

[5]  J. Wilsdon,et al.  MR Pelvimetry — A Practical Alternative , 1992, Acta radiologica.

[6]  A J van Loon,et al.  Pelvimetry by magnetic resonance imaging in breech presentation. , 1990, American journal of obstetrics and gynecology.

[7]  F. Shellock,et al.  Survey of reproductive health among female MR workers. , 1993, Radiology.

[8]  R. Edelman,et al.  Obstetric MR imaging. , 1999, Radiology.

[9]  C. Sistrom,et al.  Can fetal-pelvic disproportion be predicted. , 2000, Clinical obstetrics and gynecology.

[10]  W. Künzel,et al.  The prognostic value of magnetic resonance imaging for the management of breech delivery. , 1994, European journal of obstetrics, gynecology, and reproductive biology.

[11]  M. Morgan,et al.  Efficacy of the fetal-pelvic index in nulliparous women at high risk for fetal-pelvic disproportion. , 1992, American journal of obstetrics and gynecology.

[12]  Hedvig Hricak,et al.  Pelvimetry by magnetic resonance imaging. , 1985, AJR. American journal of roentgenology.

[13]  W. F. Mengert ESTIMATION OF PELVIC CAPACITY: Chairman's Address , 1948 .

[14]  R. Brown A modification of the Colcher-Sussman technique of x-ray pelvimetry. , 1972, The American journal of roentgenology, radium therapy, and nuclear medicine.

[15]  G. Ryan,et al.  The efficacy of x-ray pelvimetry. , 1982, American journal of obstetrics and gynecology.

[16]  D. F. Kaltreider Criteria of inlet contraction. What is their value? , 1951, American journal of obstetrics and gynecology.

[17]  W. P. Charlton,et al.  Correlation of Estradiol in Pregnancy and Anterior Cruciate Ligament Laxity , 2001, Clinical orthopaedics and related research.

[18]  H. Aronen,et al.  Low-field MRI pelvimetry , 1997, European Radiology.

[19]  M. Mandel,et al.  Ovarian and decidual relaxins in human pregnancy. , 1987, Advances in experimental medicine and biology.

[20]  W. Hänggi,et al.  Pelvimetry by Magnetic Resonance Imaging as a Diagonstic Tool to Evaluate Dystocia , 1997, Obstetrics and gynecology.

[21]  B. Macmahon,et al.  Prenatal x-ray exposure and childhood cancer. , 1962, Journal of the National Cancer Institute.

[22]  A. Maclennan,et al.  SERUM RELAXIN IN PREGNANCY , 1986, The Lancet.

[23]  S. Bergström,et al.  Sonographic assessment of symphyseal joint distention during pregnancy and post partum with special reference to pelvic pain , 1999, Acta obstetricia et gynecologica Scandinavica.

[24]  A. Stewart,et al.  Changes in the cancer risk associated with obstetric radiography. , 1968, Lancet.

[25]  J M Oduko,et al.  X-ray pelvimetry--which is the best technique? , 1997, Clinical radiology.

[26]  R. Doll,et al.  Risk of childhood cancer from fetal irradiation. , 1997, The British journal of radiology.

[27]  P. Mansfield,et al.  A three-year follow-up of children imaged in utero with echo-planar magnetic resonance , 1994 .

[28]  C. Schauberger,et al.  Peripheral joint laxity increases in pregnancy but does not correlate with serum relaxin levels. , 1996, American journal of obstetrics and gynecology.

[29]  P. Lindgren,et al.  Sonographic assessment of symphyseal joint distention intra partum , 1997, Acta obstetricia et gynecologica Scandinavica.

[30]  S. Wildermuth,et al.  Fetus and uteroplacental unit: fast MR imaging with three-dimensional reconstruction and volumetry--feasibility study. , 2001, Radiology.