HOME HELP FEEDBACK SUBSCRIPTIONS ARCHIVE SEARCH TABLE OF CONTENTS		QUICK SEARCH:   [advanced] Author: Keyword(s): Year:  Vol:  Page:

This Article Figures Only Full Text Full Text (PDF) Alert me when this article is cited Alert me if a correction is posted Citation Map Services Email this article to a friend Similar articles in this journal Similar articles in PubMed Alert me to new issues of the journal Download to citation manager Citing Articles Citing Articles via HighWire Citing Articles via Google Scholar Google Scholar Articles by Kubik-Huch, R. A. Articles by Marincek, B. Search for Related Content PubMed PubMed Citation Articles by Kubik-Huch, R. A. Articles by Marincek, B. Social Bookmarking                      What's this? Hotlight (NEW!) What's Hotlight?

Ultrafast MR Imaging of the Fetus

¹ Department of Radiology, University Hospital Zürich, Rämistr. 100, CH-8091 Zürich, Switzerland.
² Department of Obstetrics, University Hospital Zürich, CH-8091 Zürich, Switzerland.
³ Division of Biostatistics, University of Zürich, Sumatrastr. 30, CH-8006 Zürich, Switzerland.
⁴ Department of Pathology, University Hospital Zürich, CH-8091 Zürich, Switzerland.

OBJECTIVE. We examined the capability of ultrafast single-shot fast spin-echo imaging to assess different fetal organ systems compared with prenatal sonography, using autopsy or postpartum imaging as a standard of reference.

SUBJECTS AND METHODS. Thirty women with complicated pregnancies (mean age of gestation, 190 ± 54 days) underwent T2-weighted ultrafast MR imaging. MR images were analyzed with regard to diagnostic confidence in assessing abnormalities of fetal organ systems, and data were correlated with postpartum findings or necropsy. Results were compared with those of prenatal sonography.

RESULTS. Using receiver operating characteristic curve analysis, diagnostic confidence of MR imaging was best for assessing the brain (area under the curve [A_z] = 0.96) and spinal canal (A_z = 1.0), uteroplacental unit (A_z = 0.93), and lungs (A_z = 0.91). Results for the heart (A_z = 0.63) and extremities (A_z = 0.77) were significantly lower than that of other organs (p < 0.001). Diagnostic accuracy increased with gestational age. No statistically significant difference between sonography and MR imaging was found for the detection of abnormality in any organ system. In three fetuses, MR imaging was superior to sonography in characterizing cerebral abnormalities. MR imaging was inferior to sonography in characterizing abnormalities of the heart and extremities.

CONCLUSION. Our results indicate that ultrafast MR imaging can be used for in vivo fetal imaging, especially in assessing cerebral abnormalities. However, MR imaging should be restricted to situations in which sonographic findings are ambiguous or impaired.

CiteULike    Complore    Connotea    Del.icio.us    Digg    Reddit    Technorati    What's this?

This article has been cited by other articles:

				R. A. Barth and E. Rubesova Fetal Magnetic Resonance Imaging: Anomalies of the Neck, Chest, and Abdomen NeoReviews, August 1, 2007; 8(8): e313 - e335. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]

				J. F. Kazan-Tannus, V. Dialani, M. L. Kataoka, G. Chiang, H. A. Feldman, J. S. Brown, and D. Levine MR Volumetry of Brain and CSF in Fetuses Referred for Ventriculomegaly Am. J. Roentgenol., July 1, 2007; 189(1): 145 - 151. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]

				O.A. Glenn and J. Barkovich Magnetic resonance imaging of the fetal brain and spine: an increasingly important tool in prenatal diagnosis: part 2. AJNR Am. J. Neuroradiol., October 1, 2006; 27(9): 1807 - 1814. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]

				O. A. Glenn, R. B. Goldstein, K. C. Li, S. J. Young, M. E. Norton, R. F. Busse, J. D. Goldberg, and A. J. Barkovich Fetal Magnetic Resonance Imaging in the Evaluation of Fetuses Referred for Sonographically Suspected Abnormalities of the Corpus Callosum J. Ultrasound Med., June 1, 2005; 24(6): 791 - 804. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]

				N. Farhataziz, J. E. Engels, R. M. Ramus, M. Zaretsky, and D. M. Twickler Fetal MRI of Urine and Meconium by Gestational Age for the Diagnosis of Genitourinary and Gastrointestinal Abnormalities Am. J. Roentgenol., June 1, 2005; 184(6): 1891 - 1897. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]

				S. Hassibi, N. Farhataziz, M. Zaretsky, D. McIntire, and D. M. Twickler Optimization of Fetal Weight Estimates Using MRI: Comparison of Acquisitions Am. J. Roentgenol., August 1, 2004; 183(2): 487 - 492. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]

				G. Malinger, D. Lev, T. Lerman-Sagie, D. Levine, and P. Barnes Fetal Central Nervous System: MR Imaging versus Dedicated US--Need for Prospective, Blind, Comparative Studies [letter] * Drs Levine and Barnes respond: Radiology, July 1, 2004; 232(1): 306 - 307. [Full Text] [PDF]

				F. V. Coakley, O. A. Glenn, A. Qayyum, A. J. Barkovich, R. Goldstein, and R. A. Filly Fetal MRI: A Developing Technique for the Developing Patient Am. J. Roentgenol., January 1, 2004; 182(1): 243 - 252. [Full Text] [PDF]

				J. T. Caire, R. M. Ramus, K. P. Magee, B. K. Fullington, D. H. Ewalt, and D. M. Twickler MRI of Fetal Genitourinary Anomalies Am. J. Roentgenol., November 1, 2003; 181(5): 1381 - 1385. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]

				D. Levine, P. D. Barnes, R. R. Robertson, G. Wong, and T. S. Mehta Fast MR Imaging of Fetal Central Nervous System Abnormalities Radiology, October 1, 2003; 229(1): 51 - 61. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]

				R. A. Kubik-Huch, S. Wildermuth, L. Cettuzzi, A. Rake, B. Seifert, R. Chaoui, and B. Marincek Fetus and Uteroplacental Unit: Fast MR Imaging with Three-dimensional Reconstruction and Volumetry—Feasibility Study Radiology, May 1, 2001; 219(2): 567 - 573. [Abstract] [Full Text]