Postmortem fetal MR imaging: comparison with findings at autopsy.

Corroboration of Normal and Abnormal Fetal Cerebral Lamination on Postmortem MR Imaging with Postmortem Examination

“…On the other hand, T2 assessment of the cerebral lamination has a higher specificity and positive predictive value. Our findings contrasted with the findings of Woodward et al, 2 who found that T1-weighted images showed poor tissue contrast on unfixed postmortem tissues. Current antenatal MR imaging relies heavily on T2-weighted imaging for evaluation of the fetal brain, and T1-weighted imaging is not routinely used due to longer acquisition time, poor signal intensity-to-noise ratio, and greater difficulty in obtaining good-quality imaging.…”

“…Spin-echo T1 assessment of cerebral lamination was compared with axial 3D T1 assessment of cerebral lamination by using the McNemar test. 2 analysis was performed between overall fetal cerebral lamination and sulcation and gyration as evaluated at postmortem examination. P value Ͻ .05 was considered statistically significant.…”

Post-mortem MRI as an alternative to non-forensic autopsy in foetuses and children: from research into clinical practice

“…This study found that, in 60% of cases, MRI had equivalent or better diagnostic sensitivity than conventional autopsy, but included only 20 patients. Since then, many other similar small-scale studies [16][17][18][19][20][21] have shown the potential of PMMR, particularly for the central nervous system (CNS) ( Table 1). Brain and spinal cord anomalies account for 20% of fatal congenital abnormalities in foetuses, and PMMR has a high sensitivity and specificity for detecting these abnormalities in foetuses.…”

Minimally invasive fetal postmortem examination using magnetic resonance imaging and computerised tomography: current evidence and practical issues

“…Nevertheless, several research groups have subsequently performed PM MRI scanning in groups of selected cases and have reported its use in small studies (Woodward et al, 1997;Huisman et al, 2002;Alderliesten et al, 2003;Griffiths et al, 2003;Breeze et al, 2006;Brookes and Hagmann, 2006;Widjaja et al, 2006;Cohen and Whitby, 2007;Hagmann et al, 2007;Cohen et al, 2008; Table 1). With recent renewed interest in the possibility of the development of less invasive postmortem examination, for the reasons described earlier, the need for evidence regarding the accuracy of PM MRI has regained its importance.…”