Pediatric Radiology

, Volume 36, Issue 7, pp 636–646 | Cite as

Imaging of the brain in full-term neonates: does sonography still play a role?

  • Alan Daneman
  • Monica Epelman
  • Susan Blaser
  • Jose Ricardo Jarrin


To date the literature comparing the usefulness of US and MR examinations of the neonatal brain suggests that US is not as effective a modality as MR. However, available studies were done on older equipment and published descriptions of the abnormalities found in the term brain are often incomplete. The purpose of this article is to emphasize technical factors that may be useful to optimize US imaging of the term neonatal brain, to provide a description of the sonographic findings in the brain in full-term neonates with hypoxic–ischaemic injury and to provide some data regarding the accuracy of sonography. While MR imaging may reveal abnormalities of the brain more floridly than sonography, we believe that sonography remains an extremely useful modality for evaluation of the full-term neonatal brain and it is probably a more accurate modality in this age group than the current literature suggests. Further prospective studies comparing sonographic and MR imaging findings are required to document the accuracy of sonography better and to help us define the role of this modality better. Such studies may help us select which patients really require MR imaging.


Brain Neonate Ultrasonography MRI 



The authors would like to express their great appreciation to Lori Fearon for preparing the manuscript, to Danny Aguilar for preparing the images and to the US technologists and fellows in our department for their dedicated effort in performing the US examinations.


  1. 1.
    Sie LT, van der Knaap MS, van Wezel-Meijler G, et al (2000) Early MR features of hypoxic-ischemic brain injury in neonates with periventricular densities on sonograms. AJNR 21:852–861PubMedGoogle Scholar
  2. 2.
    Blankenberg FG, Loh NN, Bracci P, et al (2000) Sonography, CT, and MR imaging: a prospective comparison of neonates with suspected intracranial ischemia and hemorrhage. AJNR 21:213–219PubMedGoogle Scholar
  3. 3.
    Childs AM, Cornette L, Ramenghi LA, et al (2001) Magnetic resonance and cranial ultrasound characteristics of periventricular white matter abnormalities in newborn infants. Clin Radiol 56:647–655PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  4. 4.
    Miller SP, Cozzio CC, Goldstein RB, et al (2003) Comparing the diagnosis of white matter injury in premature newborns with serial MR imaging and transfontanel ultrasonography findings. AJNR 24:1661–1669PubMedGoogle Scholar
  5. 5.
    Debillon T, N’Guyen S, Muet A, et al (2003) Limitations of ultrasonography for diagnosing white matter damage in preterm infants. Arch Dis Child 88:275–279CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  6. 6.
    Inder TE, Anderson NJ, Spencer C, et al (2003) White matter injury in the premature infant: a comparison between serial cranial sonographic and MR findings at term. AJNR 24:805–809PubMedGoogle Scholar
  7. 7.
    Maalouf EF, Duggan PJ, Counsell SJ, et al (2001) Comparison of findings on cranial ultrasound and magnetic resonance imaging in preterm infants. Pediatrics 107:719–727PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  8. 8.
    Blankenberg FG, Norbash AM, Lane B, et al (1996) Neonatal intracranial ischemia and hemorrhage: diagnosis with US, CT and MR imaging. Radiology 199:253–259PubMedGoogle Scholar
  9. 9.
    Roelants-van Rijn AM, Groenendaal F, Beek FJ, et al (2001) Parenchymal brain injury in the preterm infant: comparison of cranial ultrasound, MRI and neurodevelopmental outcome. Neuropediatrics 32:80–89PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  10. 10.
    Winkler P (1998) Advances in paediatric CNS ultrasound. Eur J Radiol 26:109–120PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  11. 11.
    Thomson GD, Teele RL (2001) High-frequency linear array transducers for neonatal cerebral sonography. AJR 176:995–1001PubMedGoogle Scholar
  12. 12.
    Taylor G (2005) Doppler of the neonatal and infant brain. In: Rumack CM, Wilson SR, Charboneau JW, et al (eds) Diagnostic ultrasound, 3rd edn. Elsevier Mosby, St Louis, pp 1703–1722Google Scholar
  13. 13.
    Bezinque SL, Slovis TL, Touchette AS, et al (1995) Characterization of superior sagittal sinus blood flow velocity using color flow Doppler in neonates and infants. Pediatr Radiol 25:175–179PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  14. 14.
    Taylor GA (1992) Intracranial venous system in the newborn: evaluation of normal anatomy and flow characteristics with color Doppler US. Radiology 183:449–452PubMedGoogle Scholar
  15. 15.
    Dean LM, Taylor GA (1995) The intracranial venous system in infants: normal and abnormal findings on duplex and color Doppler sonography. AJR 164:151–156PubMedGoogle Scholar
  16. 16.
    Cowan F, Thoresen M (1985) Changes in superior sagittal sinus blood velocities due to postural alterations and pressure on the head of the newborn infant. Pediatrics 75:1038–1047PubMedGoogle Scholar
  17. 17.
    Epelman M, Daneman A, Konen O, et al (2003) Perinatal brain injury. A prospective comparison of state of the art ultrasound (US) and magnetic resonance imaging (MRI): can US compete with MRI? Presented at the Radiological Society of North America 89th Scientific Assembly, 30 November to 5 December 2003. Chicago, ILGoogle Scholar
  18. 18.
    Epelman M, Daneman A, Kellenberger CJ, et al (2004) Head US: evaluation and development of a better practice. Pediatr Radiol 34:S61Google Scholar
  19. 19.
    Jarrin J, Daneman A, Babyn PS, et al (2005) Ultrasound of the neonatal brain: a comprehensive illustrated guide – a multimedia CD ROM based teaching file. Presented at the Radiological Society of North America 89th Scientific Assembly, 30 November to 5 December 2003, Chicago, IL, and the Society for Pediatric Radiology 48th Annual Meeting, 4–7 May 2005, New Orleans, LAGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer-Verlag 2006

Authors and Affiliations

  • Alan Daneman
    • 1
    • 2
  • Monica Epelman
    • 1
    • 2
  • Susan Blaser
    • 1
    • 2
  • Jose Ricardo Jarrin
    • 1
    • 2
  1. 1.Department of Diagnostic ImagingHospital for Sick ChildrenTorontoCanada
  2. 2.University of TorontoTorontoCanada

Personalised recommendations