The diagnostic value and accuracy of ultrasound in diagnosing hydatidiform mole: A systematic review and meta-analysis of the literature. Issue 4 (November 2022)

• Record Type: Journal Article
• Authors: Newhouse, I.; Spacey, A.; Scragg, B.; Szczepura, K.
• Is Part Of: Radiography. Volume 28:Issue 4(2022)
• Page Start: 897
• Page End: 905
• Publication Date: 2022-11
• Subjects: Ultrasound -- Hydatidiform mole -- Complete molar -- Partial molar -- Gestational trophoblastic disease; Diagnostic imaging -- Periodicals; Radiotherapy -- Periodicals; Cancer -- Radiotherapy -- Periodicals; Diagnostic Imaging -- Periodicals; Neoplasms -- Periodicals; Radiotherapy -- Periodicals; Imagerie pour le diagnostic -- Périodiques; Radiothérapie -- Périodiques; Cancer -- Radiothérapie -- Périodiques; Electronic journals; 616.0757
• DOI: 10.1016/j.radi.2022.06.005
• Languages: English
• ISSNs: 1078-8174

Abstract

Abstract: Introduction: Hydatidiform moles are the most common type of gestational trophoblastic disease. Internationally the incidence of hydatidiform moles is 1–2:1000 pregnancies. Early detection of women with hydatidiform moles is preferential, as these women are at a higher risk of developing other gestational trophoblastic disease. Despite Ultrasound being the most common modality used to diagnose hydatidiform moles, its diagnostic value and accuracy throughout all trimesters remains uncertain. Thus, the aim of this review was to explore and evaluate the diagnostic value and accuracy of Ultrasound in diagnosing hydatidiform mole throughout all trimesters of pregnancy. Methods: The databases MEDLINE and CINAHL were searched between 2004 and 2021. Included studies were quality assessed using the Mixed Methods Appraisal Tool. Results: A total of 8 studies were included. The narrative synthesis identified four themes: Misdiagnosis, Complete and Partial molar pregnancy, Operator dependency and Gestational age. The meta-analysis highlighted although the sensitivity of ultrasound for diagnosing hydatidiform moles is relatively low at 52.2%, the specificity was high at 92.6%. Conclusion: While histological examination remains the gold standard for detecting hydatidiform moles, our review made evident that ultrasound is a beneficial diagnostic tool in the detection of Hydatidiform moles, especially alongside other diagnostic investigations. This review has highlighted and collated the main barriers and facilitators to diagnosing hydatidiform moles using ultrasound. Implication for practice: Findings suggest that although sonographic detection of hydatidiform moles remains a diagnostic challenge, seeking a second opinion or repeating scans before making a final diagnosis should be embedded into clinical practice.