|| Checking for direct PDF access through Ovid
The aim of this study was to compare the accuracy of cystoscopy and ultrasonography for the prenatal diagnosis of abnormally invasive placenta (AIP), including its subgroups: placenta accreta (PA), placenta increta (PI), and placenta percreta (PP).A retrospective observational study including a total of 85 pregnant women at high risk for AIP underwent prenatal cystoscopy and ultrasonography evaluations. The sensitivity (Se), specificity (Sp), positive predictive value, negative predictive value, and exact diagnosed were calculated and compared for both cystoscopy and ultrasonography. Se and Sp values of cystoscopy and ultrasonography were compared by means of the McNemar test.Of the 85 patients, there were 24 (28.2%) PA, 35 (41.2%) PI, 4 (4.7%) PP, and 22 (25.9%) nonadherent placenta. The mean maternal age and gestational age of delivery were 31.88 ± 4.42 years and 36.14 ± 1.84 weeks, respectively. No one was found to develop any complications with cystoscopy like urinary tract infection, or ureteral injury or perforations. Se in the diagnosis of AIP was 50.8% with ultrasonography and 61.9% for cystoscopy. Sp was 86.4% with cystoscopy and 72.7% for ultrasonography. In subgroups, Se with cystoscopy was 25.0%, 62.9%, and 100.0% in PA, PI, and PP, respectively, and 37.5%, 74.3%, and 100.0%, respectively, for ultrasonography; Sp remained unchanged with 86.4% for cystoscopy and 72.7% for ultrasonography. After McNemar test, no difference was found in either Se or Sp between cystoscopy and ultrasonography in AIP and its subgroups.According to the depth of invasion, the diagnostic value of cystoscopy and ultrasonography is all conspicuous increased and they have similar test validity for prenatal diagnosis of AIP and its subgroups.