Abstract
Objective
Our aim was to compare the value of fetal magnetic resonance imaging (MRI) with detailed ultrasound in the prenatal diagnosis of congenital abnormalities.
Materials and methods
This retrospective study reviewed the medical records of pregnant women and their neonates who, after ultrasound, were suspected to have congenital abnormalities. They then underwent a detailed ultrasound examination and a fetal MRI in our institutions. Fetal MRI was performed in 81 cases. Each prenatal presumptive diagnosis, based on detailed ultrasound examination and fetal MRI, was compared with the postnatal confirmed diagnosis. In 58 cases, the data collected were confirmed by the postnatal diagnosis.
Results
Supplemental information from fetal MRI was useful in 17 of the 22 cases involving the central nervous system (CNS), two of two cases involving the thorax, nine of nine cases involving the genitourinary system, two of eight cases involving the gastrointestinal system, and ten of ten cases involving complex malformations. Fetal MRI did not provide significantly useful information or facilitate a more accurate diagnosis except for CNS abnormalities.
Conclusion
Fetal MRI was not superior to an ultrasound examination in the prenatal detection of congenital abnormalities. A detailed ultrasound examination performed by experienced obstetricians had satisfactory accuracy in the diagnosis of fetal abnormalities compared with fetal MRI. Fetal MRI might be useful in appropriate cases in Korea. Greater effort is required to increase the ultrasound knowledge and skill of competent obstetricians.
This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.
Similar content being viewed by others
References
Pugash D, Brugger PC, Bettelheim D, Prayer D (2008) Prenatal ultrasound and fetal MRI: the comparative value of each modality in prenatal diagnosis. Eur J Radiol 68:214–226
Levine D (2006) Obstetric MRI. J Magn Reson Imaging 24:1–15
Smith FW, Adam AH, Phillips WD (1983) NMR-imaging in pregnancy. Lancet 1:61–62
Sohn YS, Kim MJ, Kwon JY, Kim YH, Park YW (2007) The usefulness of fetal MRI for prenatal diagnosis. Yonsei Med J 48:671–677
Breysem L, Bosmans H, Dymarkowski S, Schoubroeck DV, Witters I, Deprest J, Demaerel P, Vanbeckevoort D, Vanhole C, Casaer P, Smet M (2003) The value of fast MR imaging as an adjunct to ultrasound in prenatal diagnosis. Eur Radiol 13:1538–1548
Hata T, Makihara K, Aoki S, Hata K, Kitao M (1990) Magnetic resonance imaging of the fetus: initial experience. Gynecol Obstet Invest 29:255–258
Yamashita Y, Namimoto T, Abe Y, Takahashi M, Iwamasa J, Miyazaki K, Okamura H (1997) MR imaging of the fetus by a HASTE sequence. AJR Am J Roentgenol 168:513–519
Reddy UM, Filly RA, Copel JA (2008) Prenatal imaging: ultrasonography and magnetic resonance imaging. Obstet Gynecol 112:145–157
Shellock FG, Crues JV (2004) MR procedures: biologic effects, safety, and patient care. Radiology 232:635–652
Quinn TM, Hubbard AM, Adzick NS (1998) Prenatal magnetic resonance imaging enhances fetal diagnosis. J Pediatr Surg 33:553–558
Church CC, Miller MW (2007) Quantification of risk from fetal exposure to diagnostic ultrasound. Prog Biophys Mol Biol 93:331–353
Limperopoulos C, Robertson RL Jr, Khwaja OS, Robson CD, Estroff JA, Barnewolt C, Levine D, Morash D, Nemes L, Zaccagnini L, du Plessis AJ (2008) How accurately does current fetal imaging identify posterior fossa anomalies? AJR Am J Roentgenol 190:1637–1643
Adamsbaum C, Moutard ML, André C, Merzoug V, Ferey S, Quéré MP, Lewin F, Fallet-Bianco C (2005) MRI of the fetal posterior fossa. Pediatr Radiol 35:124–140
Twickler DM, Magee KP, Caire J, Zaretsky M, Fleckenstein JL, Ramus RM (2003) Second-opinion magnetic resonance imaging for suspected fetal central nervous system abnormalities. Am J Obstet Gynecol 188:492–496
Levine D, Barnes PD, Robertson RR, Wong G, Mehta TS (2003) Fast MR imaging of fetal central nervous system abnormalities. Radiology 229:51–61
Santos XM, Papanna R, Johnson A, Cass DL, Olutoye OO, Moise KJ Jr, Belleza-Bascon B, Cassady CI (2010) The use of combined ultrasound and magnetic resonance imaging in the detection of fetal anomalies. Prenat Diagn 30:402–407
Kilian AK, Schaible T, Hofmann V, Brade J, Neff KW, Büsing KA (2009) Congenital diaphragmatic hernia: predictive value of MRI relative lung-to-head ratio compared with MRI fetal lung volume and sonographic lung-to-head ratio. AJR Am J Roentgenol 192:153–158
Matsuoka S, Takeuchi K, Yamanaka Y, Kaji Y, Sugimura K, Maruo T (2003) Comparison of magnetic resonance imaging and ultrasonography in the prenatal diagnosis of congenital thoracic abnormalities. Fetal Diagn Ther 18:447–453
Rajeswaran R, Chandrasekharan A, Joseph S, Venkata Sai PM, Dev B, Reddy S (2009) Ultrasound versus MRI in the diagnosis of fetal head and trunk anomalies. Matern Fetal Neonatal Med 22:115–123
Alamo L, Tarek L, Pierre S, Reto M, Yvan V, Maria-Chiara O, Francois G (2010) Fetal MRI as complement to US in the diagnosis and characterization of anomalies of the genito-urinary tract. Eur J Radiol 76:258–264
Caire JT, Ramus RM, Magee KP, Fullington BK, Ewalt DH, Twickler DM (2003) MRI of fetal genitourinary anomalies. AJR Am J Roentgenol 181:1381–1385
Chung SM (2002) Safety issues in magnetic resonance imaging. J Neuroophthalmol 22:35–39
Conflict of interest
None.
Author information
Authors and Affiliations
Corresponding author
Rights and permissions
About this article
Cite this article
We, J.S., Young, L., Park, I.Y. et al. Usefulness of additional fetal magnetic resonance imaging in the prenatal diagnosis of congenital abnormalities. Arch Gynecol Obstet 286, 1443–1452 (2012). https://doi.org/10.1007/s00404-012-2474-4
Received:
Accepted:
Published:
Issue Date:
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s00404-012-2474-4