Three-dimensional Fetal MR Imaging: Will It Fulfill Its Promise?

Levine, Deborah

doi:10.1148/radiology.219.2.r01ma46313

Cited by 21 publications

(12 citation statements)

References 20 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Unclassified

Order By: Relevance

“…As a result, multislice 2D imaging is generally acquired in studies where motion is expected to be a problem. These allow pseudo 3D studies of the brain for fetal diagnosis (55) for fetuses exhibiting limited motion. However, motion can still induce artifacts when it occurs between data acquisition and the following RF excitation, or by inducing spin phase errors as the object moves through the magnetic field between excitation and the following data sampling acquisition.…”

Section: Background: the Emergence Of Clinical Fetal Mrimentioning

confidence: 99%

Mapping Fetal Brain Development In Utero Using Magnetic Resonance Imaging: The Big Bang of Brain Mapping

Studholme

2011

Annu. Rev. Biomed. Eng.

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

The development of tools to construct and investigate probabilistic maps of the adult human brain from MRI have led to advances in both basic neuroscience and clinical diagnosis. These tools are increasingly being applied to brain development in adolescence, childhood and even neonatal and premature neonatal imaging. Looking even earlier in development, parallel developments in clinical fetal Magnetic Resonance Imaging (MRI) have led to its growing use as a tool in challenging medical conditions. This has motivated new engineering developments that combine optimal fast MRI scans with techniques derived from computer vision that allow full 3D imaging of the moving fetal brain in utero without sedation. These promise to provide a new and unprecedented window into early human brain growth. This article will review the developments that have led us to this point, and examine the current state of the art in the fields of fast fetal imaging, motion correction and the tools to analyze dynamically changing fetal brain structure. New methods to deal with developmental tissue segmentation and the construction of spatio-temporal atlases will be examined, together with techniques to map fetal brain growth patterns.

show abstract

Section: Background: the Emergence Of Clinical Fetal Mrimentioning

confidence: 99%

Mapping Fetal Brain Development In Utero Using Magnetic Resonance Imaging: The Big Bang of Brain Mapping

Studholme

2011

Annu. Rev. Biomed. Eng.

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…Magnetic resonance (MR) imaging is a promising technique based on measurement of fetal body volume (FBV), which is multiplied by fetal density to derive the estimated fetal weight (EFW) [10,11] . Consistently, various studies concerning term pregnancies have reported a mean relative error in MR-EFW as compared with actual birth weight of nearly 3% [11][12][13][14] .…”

Section: A Longitudinal Study On Fetal Weight Estimation At Third Trimentioning

confidence: 99%

“…Challenges to MR imaging for fetal weight estimates include time-consuming fetal volume tracing and lack of evidence that improved accuracy in EFW can improve perinatal outcome [10] . The problem of time could easily be overcome by simplifying the technique [17] .…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

A Longitudinal Study on Fetal Weight Estimation at Third Trimester of Pregnancy: Comparison of Magnetic Resonance Imaging and 2-D Ultrasound Predictions

Kadji

Cannie²,

Wettere³

et al. 2017

Fetal Diagn Ther

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Objective: To prospectively compare magnetic resonance (MR) estimation of fetal weight (MR-EFW) performed at third trimester with ultrasound (US) estimation of fetal weight (US-EFW) and actual birth weight, and to evaluate factors influencing fetal growth rate near term. Methods: US-EFW and MR-EFW were calculated at a median of 33.0 and 37.7 weeks of gestation in 37 fetuses and plotted on curve centiles to predict birth weights at 39.3 weeks of gestation. The median absolute relative errors for predicted US-EFW and MR-EFW were calculated. Regression analysis was used to investigate the effect of different variables on fetal growth rate at 35.2 weeks of gestation. Results: The relative error of actual birth weight as predicted by US at 33.0 weeks was significantly higher compared with MR (7.33 vs. 4.11%; p = 0.001). This was also the case for fetal weight predicted by US at 37.7 weeks as compared with MR (6.63 vs. 2.60%; p < 0.01). Fetal growth rate was significantly and independently positively associated with the mother's weight and with gestational age at estimation (p < 0.05 for both variables). Conclusion: Fetal weight estimates predicted using MR at third trimester are better than those given by prenatal US. Fetal growth rate depends on fetal and maternal characteristics.

show abstract

“…Magnetic resonance imaging (MRI) also claims to be more accurate in determining fetal volume and, consequently, better than conventional ultrasound based techniques in estimating fetal weight [46][47][48][49][50]. But again this is a time consuming and expensive method.…”

Section: Mrimentioning

confidence: 99%

Fetal growth

Bloemenkamp

2005

International Congress Series

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Effective monitoring of fetal growth is of major importance in antenatal care. However, the clinical performance of screening methods of fetal growth abnormalities is poor and it is questionable if with current methods, antenatal detection actually improves outcome. Clinical palpation and fundal height measurements have a large range of error when predicting fetal weight. At term, clinical estimates have a significantly higher accuracy than when derived sonographically. Serial measurements of abdominal circumference (AC) and estimated fetal weight (EFW) sonographically, i.e. growth velocities are superior to single estimates of AC or EFW in the prediction of fetal growth restriction and predicting poor perinatal outcome. There is no superior formula when estimating fetal weight. The random errors are the major problem and are large. The accuracy of EFW is compromised by large intra-and interobserver variability. Efforts must be made to minimize this variability. Customized birth weight, ultrasound EFW or customized fundal height charts that are adjusted for important independent physiological variables, such as maternal weight, maternal height, ethnic group and parity, have better sensitivities for identifying small for gestational age (SGA) fetuses and intrauterine growth restriction (IUGR) and have lower false-positive rates and are predictive of poor perinatal events. 3D ultrasound and magnetic resonance imaging (MRI) are claimed to be more accurate in determining fetal volume and, consequently, better in estimating fetal weight. However, both methods are time consuming, expensive and not widely available. D 2005 Elsevier B.V. All rights reserved.

show abstract

Three-dimensional Fetal MR Imaging: Will It Fulfill Its Promise?

Cited by 21 publications

References 20 publications

Mapping Fetal Brain Development In Utero Using Magnetic Resonance Imaging: The Big Bang of Brain Mapping

Mapping Fetal Brain Development In Utero Using Magnetic Resonance Imaging: The Big Bang of Brain Mapping

A Longitudinal Study on Fetal Weight Estimation at Third Trimester of Pregnancy: Comparison of Magnetic Resonance Imaging and 2-D Ultrasound Predictions

Fetal growth

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About