Postpartum Hemorrhage
| Procedure | Appropriateness Category | Relative Radiation Level |
| US duplex Doppler pelvis | Usually Appropriate | O |
| US pelvis transabdominal | Usually Appropriate | O |
| US pelvis transvaginal | Usually Appropriate | O |
| CT abdomen and pelvis with IV contrast | May Be Appropriate | ☢☢☢ |
| CT abdomen and pelvis without and with IV contrast | May Be Appropriate (Disagreement) | ☢☢☢☢ |
| CTA abdomen and pelvis with IV contrast | May Be Appropriate | ☢☢☢☢ |
| MRI pelvis without and with IV contrast | Usually Not Appropriate | O |
| MRI pelvis without IV contrast | Usually Not Appropriate | O |
| CT abdomen and pelvis without IV contrast | Usually Not Appropriate | ☢☢☢ |
| Procedure | Appropriateness Category | Relative Radiation Level |
| US duplex Doppler pelvis | Usually Appropriate | O |
| US pelvis transabdominal | Usually Appropriate | O |
| US pelvis transvaginal | Usually Appropriate | O |
| CT abdomen and pelvis with IV contrast | May Be Appropriate | ☢☢☢ |
| CT abdomen and pelvis without IV contrast | May Be Appropriate | ☢☢☢ |
| CT abdomen and pelvis without and with IV contrast | May Be Appropriate (Disagreement) | ☢☢☢☢ |
| CTA abdomen and pelvis with IV contrast | May Be Appropriate | ☢☢☢☢ |
| MRI pelvis without and with IV contrast | Usually Not Appropriate | O |
| MRI pelvis without IV contrast | Usually Not Appropriate | O |
| Procedure | Appropriateness Category | Relative Radiation Level |
| US duplex Doppler pelvis | Usually Appropriate | O |
| US pelvis transabdominal | Usually Appropriate | O |
| US pelvis transvaginal | Usually Appropriate | O |
| MRI pelvis without and with IV contrast | May Be Appropriate | O |
| MRI pelvis without IV contrast | May Be Appropriate (Disagreement) | O |
| CT abdomen and pelvis with IV contrast | May Be Appropriate | ☢☢☢ |
| CT abdomen and pelvis without IV contrast | May Be Appropriate | ☢☢☢ |
| CT abdomen and pelvis without and with IV contrast | May Be Appropriate | ☢☢☢☢ |
| CTA abdomen and pelvis with IV contrast | May Be Appropriate | ☢☢☢☢ |
| Procedure | Appropriateness Category | Relative Radiation Level |
| US duplex Doppler pelvis | Usually Appropriate | O |
| US pelvis transabdominal | Usually Appropriate | O |
| US pelvis transvaginal | Usually Appropriate | O |
| MRI pelvis without and with IV contrast | May Be Appropriate (Disagreement) | O |
| MRI pelvis without IV contrast | May Be Appropriate (Disagreement) | O |
| CT abdomen and pelvis with IV contrast | May Be Appropriate | ☢☢☢ |
| CT abdomen and pelvis without IV contrast | May Be Appropriate | ☢☢☢ |
| CT abdomen and pelvis without and with IV contrast | May Be Appropriate | ☢☢☢☢ |
| CTA abdomen and pelvis with IV contrast | May Be Appropriate | ☢☢☢☢ |
Initial imaging is defined as imaging at the beginning of the care episode for the medical condition defined by the variant. More than one procedure can be considered usually appropriate in the initial imaging evaluation when:
- There are procedures that are equivalent alternatives (ie, only one procedure will be ordered to provide the clinical information to effectively manage the patient’s care)
OR
- There are complementary procedures (ie, more than one procedure is ordered as a set or simultaneously wherein each procedure provides unique clinical information to effectively manage the patient’s care).
A. CT Abdomen and Pelvis
B. CTA Abdomen and Pelvis
C. MRI Pelvis
D. US Duplex Doppler Pelvis
E. US Pelvis Transabdominal
F. US Pelvis Transvaginal
A. CT Abdomen and Pelvis
B. CTA Abdomen and Pelvis
C. MRI Pelvis
D. US Duplex Doppler Pelvis
E. US Pelvis Transabdominal
F. US Pelvis Transvaginal
A. CT Abdomen and Pelvis
B. CTA Abdomen and Pelvis
C. MRI Pelvis
D. US Duplex Doppler Pelvis
E. US Pelvis Transabdominal
F. US Pelvis Transvaginal
A. CT Abdomen and Pelvis
B. CTA Abdomen and Pelvis
C. MRI Pelvis
D. US Duplex Doppler Pelvis
E. US Pelvis Transabdominal
F. US Pelvis Transvaginal
The evidence table, literature search, and appendix for this topic are available at https://acsearch.acr.org/list. The appendix includes the strength of evidence assessment and the final rating round tabulations for each recommendation.
For additional information on the Appropriateness Criteria methodology and other supporting documents, please go to the ACR website at https://www.acr.org/Clinical-Resources/Clinical-Tools-and-Reference/Appropriateness-Criteria.
|
Appropriateness Category Name |
Appropriateness Rating |
Appropriateness Category Definition |
|
Usually Appropriate |
7, 8, or 9 |
The imaging procedure or treatment is indicated in the specified clinical scenarios at a favorable risk-benefit ratio for patients. |
|
May Be Appropriate |
4, 5, or 6 |
The imaging procedure or treatment may be indicated in the specified clinical scenarios as an alternative to imaging procedures or treatments with a more favorable risk-benefit ratio, or the risk-benefit ratio for patients is equivocal. |
|
May Be Appropriate (Disagreement) |
5 |
The individual ratings are too dispersed from the panel median. The different label provides transparency regarding the panel’s recommendation. “May be appropriate” is the rating category and a rating of 5 is assigned. |
|
Usually Not Appropriate |
1, 2, or 3 |
The imaging procedure or treatment is unlikely to be indicated in the specified clinical scenarios, or the risk-benefit ratio for patients is likely to be unfavorable. |
Potential adverse health effects associated with radiation exposure are an important factor to consider when selecting the appropriate imaging procedure. Because there is a wide range of radiation exposures associated with different diagnostic procedures, a relative radiation level (RRL) indication has been included for each imaging examination. The RRLs are based on effective dose, which is a radiation dose quantity that is used to estimate population total radiation risk associated with an imaging procedure. Patients in the pediatric age group are at inherently higher risk from exposure, because of both organ sensitivity and longer life expectancy (relevant to the long latency that appears to accompany radiation exposure). For these reasons, the RRL dose estimate ranges for pediatric examinations are lower as compared with those specified for adults (see Table below). Additional information regarding radiation dose assessment for imaging examinations can be found in the ACR Appropriateness Criteria® Radiation Dose Assessment Introduction document.
|
Relative Radiation Level Designations |
||
|
Relative Radiation Level* |
Adult Effective Dose Estimate Range |
Pediatric Effective Dose Estimate Range |
|
O |
0 mSv |
0 mSv |
|
☢ |
<0.1 mSv |
<0.03 mSv |
|
☢☢ |
0.1-1 mSv |
0.03-0.3 mSv |
|
☢☢☢ |
1-10 mSv |
0.3-3 mSv |
|
☢☢☢☢ |
10-30 mSv |
3-10 mSv |
|
☢☢☢☢☢ |
30-100 mSv |
10-30 mSv |
|
*RRL assignments for some of the examinations cannot be made, because the actual patient doses in these procedures vary as a function of a number of factors (e.g., region of the body exposed to ionizing radiation, the imaging guidance that is used). The RRLs for these examinations are designated as “Varies.” |
||
| 1. | Clark SL, Belfort MA, Dildy GA, Herbst MA, Meyers JA, Hankins GD. Maternal death in the 21st century: causes, prevention, and relationship to cesarean delivery. Am J Obstet Gynecol. 2008;199(1):36 e31-35; discussion 91-32 e37-11. | |
| 2. | Say L, Chou D, Gemmill A, et al. Global causes of maternal death: a WHO systematic analysis. Lancet Glob Health. 2014;2(6):e323-333. | |
| 3. | Sheldon WR, Blum J, Vogel JP, et al. Postpartum haemorrhage management, risks, and maternal outcomes: findings from the World Health Organization Multicountry Survey on Maternal and Newborn Health. BJOG 2014;121 Suppl 1:5-13. | |
| 4. | Committee on Practice B-O. Practice Bulletin No. 183: Postpartum Hemorrhage. Obstet Gynecol 2017;130:e168-e86. | |
| 5. | American College of Radiology. ACR Appropriateness Criteria®: Suspected Placenta Accreta Spectrum Disorder. Available at: https://acsearch.acr.org/docs/3102403/Narrative/. | |
| 6. | Dudiak KM, Maturen KE, Akin EA, et al. ACR Appropriateness Criteria® Gestational Trophoblastic Disease. J Am Coll Radiol 2019;16:S348-S63. | |
| 7. | Timmerman D, Wauters J, Van Calenbergh S, et al. Color Doppler imaging is a valuable tool for the diagnosis and management of uterine vascular malformations. Ultrasound Obstet Gynecol. 2003;21(6):570-577. | |
| 8. | Van den Bosch T, Van Schoubroeck D, Timmerman D. Maximum Peak Systolic Velocity and Management of Highly Vascularized Retained Products of Conception. Journal of ultrasound in medicine : official journal of the American Institute of Ultrasound in Medicine 2015;34:1577-82. | |
| 9. | Groszmann YS, Healy Murphy AL, Benacerraf BR. Diagnosis and management of patients with enhanced myometrial vascularity associated with retained products of conception. Ultrasound in obstetrics & gynecology : the official journal of the International Society of Ultrasound in Obstetrics and Gynecology 2018;52:396-99. | |
| 10. | American College of Radiology. ACR–NASCI–SIR–SPR Practice Parameter for the Performance and Interpretation of Body Computed Tomography Angiography (CTA). Available at: https://gravitas.acr.org/PPTS/GetDocumentView?docId=164+&releaseId=2. | |
| 11. | Wolman I, Altman E, Fait G, et al. Evacuating retained products of conception in the setting of an ultrasound unit. Fertil Steril. 2009;91(4 Suppl):1586-1588. | |
| 12. | Sierra A, Burrel M, Sebastia C, et al. Utility of multidetector CT in severe postpartum hemorrhage. Radiographics. 2012;32(5):1463-1481. | |
| 13. | Lee NK, Kim S, Lee JW, et al. Postpartum hemorrhage: Clinical and radiologic aspects. Eur J Radiol. 2010;74(1):50-59. | |
| 14. | Laifer-Narin SL, Kwak E, Kim H, Hecht EM, Newhouse JH. Multimodality imaging of the postpartum or posttermination uterus: evaluation using ultrasound, computed tomography, and magnetic resonance imaging. Curr Probl Diagn Radiol. 2014;43(6):374-385. | |
| 15. | Rodgers SK, Kirby CL, Smith RJ, Horrow MM. Imaging after cesarean delivery: acute and chronic complications. Radiographics. 2012;32(6):1693-1712. | |
| 16. | Shanbhogue AK, Menias CO, Lalwani N, Lall C, Khandelwal A, Nagar A. Obstetric (nonfetal) complications. Radiol Clin North Am. 2013;51(6):983-1004. | |
| 17. | Takeda A, Koike W, Imoto S, Nakamura H. Three-dimensional computerized tomographic angiography for diagnosis and management of intractable postpartum hemorrhage. Eur J Obstet Gynecol Reprod Biol. 176:104-11, 2014 May. | |
| 18. | Lee NK, Kim S, Kim CW, Lee JW, Jeon UB, Suh DS. Identification of bleeding sites in patients with postpartum hemorrhage: MDCT compared with angiography. AJR Am J Roentgenol. 194(2):383-90, 2010 Feb. | |
| 19. | Hugues C, Le Bras Y, Coatleven F, et al. Vascular uterine abnormalities: Comparison of imaging findings and clinical outcomes. Eur J Radiol. 84(12):2485-91, 2015 Dec. | |
| 20. | Baba Y, Matsubara S, Kuwata T, et al. Uterine artery pseudoaneurysm: not a rare condition occurring after non-traumatic delivery or non-traumatic abortion. Arch Gynecol Obstet. 2014;290(3):435-440. | |
| 21. | Yi SW, Lee JH. Uterine pseudoaneurysm leakage may cause delayed postpartum haemorrhage: multidetector CT with angiography and transcatheter uterine arterial embolisation. J Obstet Gynaecol. 2012;32(6):552-555. | |
| 22. | Leyendecker JR, Gorengaut V, Brown JJ. MR imaging of maternal diseases of the abdomen and pelvis during pregnancy and the immediate postpartum period. Radiographics. 2004;24(5):1301-1316. | |
| 23. | Jain KA, Olcott EW. Magnetic resonance imaging of postpartum pelvic hematomas: early experience in diagnosis and treatment planning. Magn Reson Imaging. 1999;17(7):973-977. | |
| 24. | Matijevic R, Knezevic M, Grgic O, Zlodi-Hrsak L. Diagnostic accuracy of sonographic and clinical parameters in the prediction of retained products of conception. J Ultrasound Med. 2009;28(3):295-299. | |
| 25. | Sellmyer MA, Desser TS, Maturen KE, Jeffrey RB, Jr., Kamaya A. Physiologic, histologic, and imaging features of retained products of conception. Radiographics 2013;33:781-96. | |
| 26. | Maleux G, Timmerman D, Heye S, Wilms G. Acquired uterine vascular malformations: radiological and clinical outcome after transcatheter embolotherapy. Eur Radiol. 2006;16(2):299-306. | |
| 27. | van den Bosch T, Daemen A, Van Schoubroeck D, Pochet N, De Moor B, Timmerman D. Occurrence and outcome of residual trophoblastic tissue: a prospective study. Journal of ultrasound in medicine : official journal of the American Institute of Ultrasound in Medicine 2008;27:357-61. | |
| 28. | Van Schoubroeck D, Van den Bosch T, Scharpe K, Lu C, Van Huffel S, Timmerman D. Prospective evaluation of blood flow in the myometrium and uterine arteries in the puerperium. Ultrasound in obstetrics & gynecology : the official journal of the International Society of Ultrasound in Obstetrics and Gynecology 2004;23:378-81. | |
| 29. | Kawamura Y, Kondoh E, Hamanishi J, et al. Treatment decision-making for post-partum hemorrhage using dynamic contrast-enhanced computed tomography. J Obstet Gynaecol Res. 40(1):67-74, 2014 Jan. | |
| 30. | Yamashita Y, Torashima M, Harada M, Yamamoto H, Takahashi M. Postpartum extraperitoneal pelvic hematoma: imaging findings. AJR Am J Roentgenol. 1993;161(4):805-808. | |
| 31. | Belachew J, Axelsson O, Eurenius K, Mulic-Lutvica A. Three-dimensional ultrasound does not improve diagnosis of retained placental tissue compared to two-dimensional ultrasound. Acta Obstet Gynecol Scand. 2015;94(1):112-116. | |
| 32. | Cosmi E, Saccardi C, Litta P, Nardelli GB, Dessole S. Transvaginal ultrasound and sonohysterography for assessment of postpartum residual trophoblastic tissue. Int J Gynaecol Obstet. 2010;110(3):262-264. | |
| 33. | Nalaboff KM, Pellerito JS, Ben-Levi E. Imaging the endometrium: disease and normal variants. Radiographics. 2001;21(6):1409-1424. | |
| 34. | Zuckerman J, Levine D, McNicholas MM, et al. Imaging of pelvic postpartum complications. AJR Am J Roentgenol. 1997;168(3):663-668. | |
| 35. | American College of Radiology. ACR Appropriateness Criteria® Radiation Dose Assessment Introduction. Available at: https://edge.sitecorecloud.io/americancoldf5f-acrorgf92a-productioncb02-3650/media/ACR/Files/Clinical/Appropriateness-Criteria/ACR-Appropriateness-Criteria-Radiation-Dose-Assessment-Introduction.pdf. |
The ACR Committee on Appropriateness Criteria and its expert panels have developed criteria for determining appropriate imaging examinations for diagnosis and treatment of specified medical condition(s). These criteria are intended to guide radiologists, radiation oncologists and referring physicians in making decisions regarding radiologic imaging and treatment. Generally, the complexity and severity of a patient’s clinical condition should dictate the selection of appropriate imaging procedures or treatments. Only those examinations generally used for evaluation of the patient’s condition are ranked. Other imaging studies necessary to evaluate other co-existent diseases or other medical consequences of this condition are not considered in this document. The availability of equipment or personnel may influence the selection of appropriate imaging procedures or treatments. Imaging techniques classified as investigational by the FDA have not been considered in developing these criteria; however, study of new equipment and applications should be encouraged. The ultimate decision regarding the appropriateness of any specific radiologic examination or treatment must be made by the referring physician and radiologist in light of all the circumstances presented in an individual examination.