Ultrasound<i>versus</i>MRI in the diagnosis of fetal head and trunk anomalies

Rangasami, Rajeswaran; Chandrasekharan, Anupama; Joseph, Santhosh; Sai, P M Venkata; Dev, Bhawna; Reddy, Shilpa

doi:10.1080/14767050802488238

Cited by 30 publications

(23 citation statements)

References 14 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Unclassified

Order By: Relevance

“…USS was performed in a tertiary centre and/or conducted by foetal medicine experts in 21/34 studies [3, 18–21, 26–29, 31, 32, 35–38, 40–43, 47], in 12/34 it was either unclear or not specified [22–24, 30, 33, 34, 39, 45, 46, 48–50], and in one study [44] USS was performed in a routine clinical setting. Clear details regarding USS technique (transabdominal or transvaginal, views obtained) and equipment (manufacturer, transducer) were provided in 21 studies [18–20, 22, 24–26, 28, 32–37, 39, 40, 42, 43, 47, 48, 50].…”

Section: Resultsmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…Clear details regarding USS technique (transabdominal or transvaginal, views obtained) and equipment (manufacturer, transducer) were provided in 21 studies [18–20, 22, 24–26, 28, 32–37, 39, 40, 42, 43, 47, 48, 50]. The remaining 13 studies [3, 21, 23, 27, 29–31, 38, 41, 44–46, 49] provided minimal information or details were not given. Three out of 34 acknowledged technical difficulties in some cases which limited the USS [3, 28, 48].…”

Section: Resultsmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…The age range of foetuses reported across studies was 13–41 weeks gestation. Time delay between USS and iuMR was less than 2 weeks in 19/34 [3, 18–21, 23–25, 27, 30, 32, 33, 39, 41, 42, 44, 46, 47, 49] and not specified in 13/34 studies [22, 26, 28, 29, 31, 34, 36, 38, 40, 43, 45, 48, 50]. In two studies [35, 37] there were cases in which the time delay was greater than 2 weeks.…”

Section: Resultsmentioning

confidence: 99%

See 2 more Smart Citations

A systematic review and meta-analysis to determine the contribution of mr imaging to the diagnosis of foetal brain abnormalities In Utero

et al. 2016

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

ObjectivesThis systematic review was undertaken to define the diagnostic performance of in utero MR (iuMR) imaging when attempting to confirm, exclude or provide additional information compared with the information provided by prenatal ultrasound scans (USS) when there is a suspicion of foetal brain abnormality.MethodsElectronic databases were searched as well as relevant journals and conference proceedings. Reference lists of applicable studies were also explored. Data extraction was conducted by two reviewers independently to identify relevant studies for inclusion in the review. Inclusion criteria were original research that reported the findings of prenatal USS and iuMR imaging and findings in terms of accuracy as judged by an outcome reference diagnosis for foetal brain abnormalities.Results34 studies met the inclusion criteria which allowed diagnostic accuracy to be calculated in 959 cases, all of which had an outcome reference diagnosis determined by postnatal imaging, surgery or autopsy. iuMR imaging gave the correct diagnosis in 91 % which was an increase of 16 % above that achieved by USS alone.ConclusioniuMR imaging makes a significant contribution to the diagnosis of foetal brain abnormalities, increasing the diagnostic accuracy achievable by USS alone.Key points • Ultrasound is the primary modality for monitoring foetal brain development during pregnancy • iuMRI used together with ultrasound is more accurate for detecting foetal brain abnormalities • iuMR imaging is most helpful for detecting midline brain abnormalities • The moderate heterogeneity of reviewed studies may compromise findings

show abstract

Section: Resultsmentioning

confidence: 99%

Section: Resultsmentioning

confidence: 99%

Section: Resultsmentioning

confidence: 99%

See 1 more Smart Citation

A systematic review and meta-analysis to determine the contribution of mr imaging to the diagnosis of foetal brain abnormalities In Utero

et al. 2016

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…In tal senso l'esame ecografi co riveste un ruolo chiave per la diagnosi prenatale precoce delle LBS, e soprattutto per l'identifi cazione del coinvolgimento palatale (LPS); l'accurata defi nizione dell'estensione del cleft è alla base di un corretto inquadramento diagnostico, del counseling con i genitori e della pianifi cazione terapeutica [5].…”

Section: Parole Chiave Rm Fetale · Labioschisi · Labio-palatoschisi ·unclassified

“…Accurate evaluation of the extension of the cleft underpins a correct diagnosis, parent counselling and treatment planning [5].…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Fetal MRI as a complement to US in the evaluation of cleft lip and palate

et al. 2011

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

Fetus

Liau¹,

Semelka²,

Brown³

et al. 2015

Abdominal‐Pelvic MRI

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

UltrasoundversusMRI in the diagnosis of fetal head and trunk anomalies

Abstract: More number of confident diagnoses could be obtained by MRI when compared with that by US, in the evaluation of fetal CNS and thoracic anomalies. MRI can be used in complex fetal anomalies as a supplementary tool following US.

Cited by 30 publications

References 14 publications

A systematic review and meta-analysis to determine the contribution of mr imaging to the diagnosis of foetal brain abnormalities In Utero

A systematic review and meta-analysis to determine the contribution of mr imaging to the diagnosis of foetal brain abnormalities In Utero

Fetal MRI as a complement to US in the evaluation of cleft lip and palate

Fetus

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About