In the literature, there are quite a few publications about MR pelvimetry (
11-
14). However, this is the first study to evaluate the stability of SCA women’s and SCT women’s pelvises by studying MR pelvimetry. Our results showed that there is no difference in pelvic diameters among SCA and SCT women with non-hemoglobinopathies.
There are high rates of prenatal and natal complications in women with SCA and SCT (
6,
15). Pre-eclampsia and risks of pregnancy-induced hypertension have been demonstrated in both large retrospective studies and small observational studies (
16-
18). Furthermore, increased fetal growth retardation, premature births, and fetal morbidity were observed in these patients (
19,
20). Incidences of abortion and neonatal deaths in previous pregnancies were also significantly increased in women with SCT (
6). These maternal and fetal complications are caused by an increase in cesarean section rates (
3,
15). When deciding on modes of delivery, it is also important to test for fetal-pelvic disproportion, since fetomaternal morbidity and mortality increase with prolonged labor (
9). In our study, cesarean sections and vaginal births were observed in SCA groups despite the small number of patients. A higher number of cesarean sections were detected in the SCT group.
Dystocia due to pelvic narrowing is one indication that a cesarean section may be necessary. In this respect, assessments of exact pelvic diameters in women with SCA and SCT may decrease cesarean rates in these patients. Various radiological techniques are useful for clinical examinations in conformity assessments for vaginal delivery. In this context, various radiological techniques are helpful for clinical examinations in conformity assessments for vaginal delivery. Radiographic pelvimetry has been used for most of this century to predict obstetric results although there is substantial variation for routine utilization in practice. Its use is now being criticized mainly due to the high radiation dose required (
21). Newer technologies such as computed tomography and MR scanning are increasingly being favored in this area, especially for MR pelvimetry, which does not involve ionizing radiation (
14,
22). Moreover, calculation mistakes for radiographic imaging occur at a rate of approximately 10%; whereas, MR scanning is much more accurate with mistakes occurring at a rate of approximately 1% (
7).
MR pelvimetry was introduced in 1985 by Stark et al. It provides pelvic sizes in all planes when imaging soft tissue structures, including the fetus (
11). MR pelvimetry has replaced with conventional radiography and computed tomography because it does not contain ionizing radiation and provides accurate and objective data (
12).
Keller et al. (
12) conducted the most extensive research about MR pelvimetry. Pelvimetric data from 781 women were reviewed and correlated with obstetric backgrounds to reproduce standard values. In this study, pelvimetric measurements were lower in women who had cesarean sections or vacuum extractions when compared with those who delivered vaginally. The pelvimetric parameters associated with the largest measurement mistakes are the intertuberous and sagittal outlet.
Gowri et al. (
14) conducted the second most extensive series of studies concerning MR pelvimetry. Pelvimetric data were reviewed from 125 women after previous cesarean sections. All the diameters except the sagittal inlet were significantly larger in women who delivered normally when compared with those who had cesarean sections for any reason. An outlet index and pelvic diameters (transverse inlet, sagittal outlet, interspinous, and intertuberous diameter) were useful cut-off points for vaginal deliveries within their study populations.
Korhonen et al. (
23) evaluated 100 MR pelvimetry examinations. Pelvimetric parameters of the pelvic inlet and outlet were measured four times to determine the standard reference for each measurement, and then intra- and inter-observer variations were compared. They found that millimeter differences were insignificant in MR pelvimetry.
Our study has demonstrated that pelvimetric dimensions (sagittal inlet, sagittal mid-pelvis, transverse inlet, transverse mid-pelvis, and transverse outlet) of women with SCA and SCT are indistinguishable from healthy women.
There were some limitations in our study. First, we had a small sample size. Second, MR has a relatively high cost and limited availability. We used age and sex matched control group without body mass index matching due to low weight of SCA patient according to population. This may also cause partial bias and present as another limitation of our study.
Finally, our study demonstrated that the pelvic roofs of women with SCA and SCT are indistinguishable from healthy women. We think that these patients choose cesarean section/ rather than dystocia because of other pregnancy complications. Therefore, the rates of fetomaternal incompatibilities affecting delivery types are the same in healthy individuals and women with SCA and SCT. When making decisions about modes of delivery, these results should be taken into consideration.