Startseite Fetal MRI, lower acceptance by women in research vs. clinical setting
Artikel
Lizenziert
Nicht lizenziert Erfordert eine Authentifizierung

Fetal MRI, lower acceptance by women in research vs. clinical setting

  • Bloeme J. van der Knoop EMAIL logo , Roland J. Vermeulen , Jonathan I.M.L. Verbeke , Lourens R. Pistorius und Johanna I.P. de Vries
Veröffentlicht/Copyright: 14. Oktober 2017
Journal of Perinatal Medicine
Aus der Zeitschrift Journal of Perinatal Medicine Band 46 Heft 9

Abstract

Aim:

To determine acceptance of pregnant women to undergo fetal magnetic resonance imaging (MRI) examination in research and clinical setting.

Methods:

A prospective study included a research group [part of a study comparing brain ultrasound (US) to MRI in fetuses at risk for acquired brain damage] and a clinical group [fetuses with suspected (brain) anomalies after structural US examination] from 2011 to 2014. All women were advised to use sedatives. MRI declinations, use of sedation, MRI duration and imaging quality were compared between both groups.

Results:

Study participation was accepted in 57/104 (55%) research cases. Fetal MRI was performed in 34/104 (33%) research and 43/44 (98%) clinical cases. Reasons to decline study participation were MRI related in 41%, and participation was too burdensome in 46%. Acceptance was highest for indication infection and lowest in alloimmune thrombocytopenia and monochorionic twin pregnancy. Sedatives were used in 14/34 research and 43/43 clinical cases. Scan duration and quality were comparable (21 and 20 min in research and clinical cases, respectively, moderate/good quality in both groups).

Conclusions:

Pregnant women consider MRI more burdensome than professionals realize. Two-third of women at risk for fetal brain damage decline MRI examination. Future studies should evaluate which information about fetal MRI is supportive.

Keywords: Acceptance; CNS; fetal brain; fetal MRI; image quality; sedatives
Corresponding author: Bloeme J. van der Knoop, MD, Department of Obstetrics and Gynaecology, VU University Medical Center, P.O. Box 7057, 1007 MB Amsterdam, The Netherlands, Tel.: +31 (0) 20 4443239 or +31 (0) 20 4444444, pager 6112, Fax: +31 (0) 20 4443333; and Neuroscience Campus, VU University, Amsterdam, The Netherlands
aPresent address: Department of Child Neurology, Maastricht University Medical Center, P.O. Box 5800, 6202 AZ Maastricht, The Netherlands.bPresent address: Department of Obstetrics and Gynaecology, University of Stellenbosch/Tygerberg Hospital, Private Bag X3, Tygerberg, 7505, South Africa.

Acknowledgments

The authors would like to thank Frederik Barkhof for the assessment of the MRI quality, and Ton Schweigmann and Petra Pouwels for their contribution in realizing the execution of the MRIs. Scanning costs for Fetal Brain Imaging study in part funded by the Amsterdam Brain Imaging Platform (ABIP), Amsterdam, The Netherlands (ABIP-2011-23).

  1. Author’s statement

  2. Conflict of interest: Authors state no conflict of interest.

  3. Material and methods: Informed consent: Informed consent has been obtained from all individuals included in this study.

  4. Ethical approval: The research related to human subject use has complied with all the relevant national regulations, and institutional policies, and is in accordance with the tenets of the Helsinki Declaration, and has been approved by the authors’ institutional review board or equivalent committee.

References

[1] Griffiths PD, Paley MN, Widjaja E, Taylor C, Whitby EH. In utero magnetic resonance imaging for brain and spinal abnormalities in fetuses. Br Med J. 2005;331:562–5.10.1136/bmj.331.7516.562Suche in Google Scholar PubMed PubMed Central

[2] Bulas D, Egloff A. Benefits and risks of MRI in pregnancy. Semin Perinatol. 2013;37:301–4.10.1053/j.semperi.2013.06.005Suche in Google Scholar PubMed

[3] Guideline. ACR-SPR Practice Guideline for the safe and optimal performance of fetal magnetic resonance imaging (MRI). Available from: https://www.acr.org/Quality-Safety/Standards-Guidelines/Practice-Guidelines-by-Modality/MRI. 2010.Suche in Google Scholar

[4] Simon EM, Goldstein RB, Coakley FV, Filly RA, Broderick KC, Musci TJ, et al. Fast MR imaging of fetal CNS anomalies in utero. AJNR Am J Neuroradiol. 2000;21:1688–98.Suche in Google Scholar

[5] Barkovich AJ, Girard N. Fetal brain infections. Childs Nerv Syst. 2003;19:501–7.10.1007/s00381-003-0763-8Suche in Google Scholar PubMed

[6] Glenn OA, Barkovich J. Magnetic resonance imaging of the fetal brain and spine: an increasingly important tool in prenatal diagnosis: part 2. AJNR Am J Neuroradiol. 2006;27:1807–14.Suche in Google Scholar

[7] Ismail KM, Ashworth JR, Martin WL, Chapman S, McHugo J, Whittle MJ, et al. Fetal magnetic resonance imaging in prenatal diagnosis of central nervous system abnormalities: 3-year experience. J Matern Fetal Neonatal Med. 2002;12:185–90.10.1080/jmf.12.3.185.190Suche in Google Scholar PubMed

[8] Bendersky M, Musolino PL, Rugilo C, Schuster G, Sica RE. Normal anatomy of the developing fetal brain. Ex vivo anatomical-magnetic resonance imaging correlation. J Neurol Sci. 2006;250:20–6.10.1016/j.jns.2006.06.020Suche in Google Scholar PubMed

[9] Dubois J, Benders M, Cachia A, Lazeyras F, Ha-Vinh LR, Sizonenko SV, et al. Mapping the early cortical folding process in the preterm newborn brain. Cereb Cortex. 2008;18:1444–54.10.1093/cercor/bhm180Suche in Google Scholar PubMed

[10] Garel C, Delezoide AL, Elmaleh-Berges M, Menez F, Fallet-Bianco C, Vuillard E, et al. Contribution of fetal MR imaging in the evaluation of cerebral ischemic lesions. AJNR Am J Neuroradiol. 2004;25:1563–8.Suche in Google Scholar

[11] Garel C, Chantrel E, Brisse H, Elmaleh M, Luton D, Oury JF, et al. Fetal cerebral cortex: normal gestational landmarks identified using prenatal MR imaging. AJNR Am J Neuroradiol. 2001;22:184–9.Suche in Google Scholar

[12] Prayer D, Brugger PC, Prayer L. Fetal MRI: techniques and protocols. Pediatr Radiol. 2004;34:685–93.10.1007/s00247-004-1246-0Suche in Google Scholar PubMed

[13] Nemec U, Nemec SF, Weber M, Brugger PC, Kasprian G, Bettelheim D, et al. Human long bone development in vivo: analysis of the distal femoral epimetaphysis on MR images of fetuses. Radiology 2013;267:570–80.10.1148/radiol.13112441Suche in Google Scholar PubMed

[14] Thomason ME, Dassanayake MT, Shen S, Katkuri Y, Alexis M, Anderson AL, et al. Cross-hemispheric functional connectivity in the human fetal brain. Sci Transl Med. 2013;5:173ra24.10.1126/scitranslmed.3004978Suche in Google Scholar PubMed PubMed Central

[15] Egana-Ugrinovic G, Sanz-Cortes M, Figueras F, Bargallo N, Gratacos E. Differences in cortical development assessed by fetal MRI in late-onset intrauterine growth restriction. Am J Obstet Gynecol. 2013;209:126.e1–8.10.1016/j.ajog.2013.04.008Suche in Google Scholar PubMed

[16] Vatansever D, Kyriakopoulou V, Allsop JM, Fox M, Chew A, Hajnal JV, et al. Multidimensional analysis of fetal posterior fossa in health and disease. Cerebellum 2013;12:632–44.10.1007/s12311-013-0470-2Suche in Google Scholar PubMed

[17] Glenn OA, Cuneo AA, Barkovich AJ, Hashemi Z, Bartha AI, Xu D. Malformations of cortical development: diagnostic accuracy of fetal MR imaging. Radiology 2012;263:843–55.10.1148/radiol.12102492Suche in Google Scholar PubMed PubMed Central

[18] Rossi AC, Prefumo F. Additional value of fetal magnetic resonance imaging in the prenatal diagnosis of central nervous system anomalies: a systematic review of the literature. Ultrasound Obstet Gynecol. 2014;44:388–93.10.1002/uog.13429Suche in Google Scholar PubMed

[19] Putbrese B, Kennedy A. Findings and differential diagnosis of fetal intracranial haemorrhage and fetal ischaemic brain injury: what is the role of fetal MRI? Br J Radiol. 2017;90:20160253.10.1259/bjr.20160253Suche in Google Scholar PubMed PubMed Central

[20] Sanz Cortes M, Bargallo N, Arranz A, Simoes R, Figueras F, Gratacos E. Feasibility and success rate of a fetal MRI and MR spectroscopy research protocol performed at term using a 3.0-Tesla scanner. Fetal Diagn Ther. 2017;41:127–35.10.1159/000445947Suche in Google Scholar PubMed

[21] Malinger G, Lerman-Sagie T. Re: additional value of fetal magnetic resonance imaging in the prenatal diagnosis of central nervous system anomalies: a systematic review of the literature. Ultrasound Obstet Gynecol. 2015;45:236–7.10.1002/uog.14740Suche in Google Scholar PubMed

[22] Leithner K, Prayer D, Porstner E, Kapusta ND, Stammler-Safar M, Krampl-Bettelheim E, et al. Psychological reactions related to fetal magnetic resonance imaging: a follow-up study. J Perinat Med. 2013;41:273–6.10.1515/jpm-2012-0218Suche in Google Scholar PubMed

[23] Leithner K, Pornbacher S, Assem-Hilger E, Krampl-Bettelheim E, Prayer D. Prenatal magnetic resonance imaging: towards optimized patient information. Ultrasound Obstet Gynecol. 2009;34:182–7.10.1002/uog.6391Suche in Google Scholar PubMed

[24] Leithner K, Pornbacher S, Assem-Hilger E, Krampl E, Ponocny-Seliger E, Prayer D. Psychological reactions in women undergoing fetal magnetic resonance imaging. Obstet Gynecol. 2008;111:396–402.10.1097/AOG.0b013e3181610281Suche in Google Scholar PubMed

[25] Clements H, Duncan KR, Fielding K, Gowland PA, Johnson IR, Baker PN. Infants exposed to MRI in utero have a normal paediatric assessment at 9 months of age. Br J Radiol. 2000;73: 190–4.10.1259/bjr.73.866.10884733Suche in Google Scholar PubMed

[26] Chew S, Ahmadi A, Goh PS, Foong LC. The effects of 1.5 T magnetic resonance imaging on early murine in-vitro embryo development. J Magn Reson Imaging. 2001;13:417–20.10.1002/jmri.1060Suche in Google Scholar

[27] Kok RD, de Vries MM, Heerschap A, van den Berg PP. Absence of harmful effects of magnetic resonance exposure at 1.5 T in utero during the third trimester of pregnancy: a follow-up study. Magn Reson Imaging. 2004;22:851–4.10.1016/j.mri.2004.01.047Suche in Google Scholar

[28] Baker PN, Johnson IR, Harvey PR, Gowland PA, Mansfield P. A three-year follow-up of children imaged in utero with echo-planar magnetic resonance. Am J Obstet Gynecol. 1994;170:32–3.10.1016/S0002-9378(94)70379-5Suche in Google Scholar

[29] Patenaude Y, Pugash D, Lim K, Morin L, Lim K, Bly S, et al. The use of magnetic resonance imaging in the obstetric patient. J Obstet Gynaecol Can. 2014;36:349–63.10.1016/S1701-2163(15)30612-5Suche in Google Scholar

[30] Guerra B, Simonazzi G, Puccetti C, Lanari M, Farina A, Lazzarotto T, et al. Ultrasound prediction of symptomatic congenital cytomegalovirus infection. Am J Obstet Gynecol. 2008;198:380–7.10.1016/j.ajog.2007.09.052Suche in Google Scholar PubMed

[31] Ortibus E, Lopriore E, Deprest J, Vandenbussche FP, Walther FJ, Diemert A, et al. The pregnancy and long-term neurodevelopmental outcome of monochorionic diamniotic twin gestations: a multicenter prospective cohort study from the first trimester onward. Am J Obstet Gynecol. 2009;200:494–8.10.1016/j.ajog.2009.01.048Suche in Google Scholar PubMed

[32] Malamateniou C, McGuinness AK, Allsop JM, O‘Regan DP, Rutherford MA, Hajnal JV. Snapshot inversion recovery: an optimized single-shot T1-weighted inversion-recovery sequence for improved fetal brain anatomic delineation. Radiology 2011;258:229–35.10.1148/radiol.10100381Suche in Google Scholar PubMed

[33] Plunk MR, Chapman T. The fundamentals of fetal MR imaging: Part 1. Curr Probl Diagn Radiol. 2014;43:331–46.10.1067/j.cpradiol.2014.05.014Suche in Google Scholar PubMed

[34] Weishaupt D, Treiber K, Kundert HP, Zollinger H, Vienne P, Hodler J, et al. Morton neuroma: MR imaging in prone, supine, and upright weight-bearing body positions. Radiology 2003;226:849–56.10.1148/radiol.2263011925Suche in Google Scholar PubMed

[35] Hallgren KA. Computing inter-rater reliability for observational data: an overview and tutorial. Tutor Quant Methods Psychol. 2012;8:23–34.10.20982/tqmp.08.1.p023Suche in Google Scholar PubMed PubMed Central

[36] Levine D. Timing of MRI in pregnancy, repeat exams, access, and physician qualifications. Semin Perinatol. 2013;37:340–4.10.1053/j.semperi.2013.06.011Suche in Google Scholar PubMed

[37] Verburg B, Fink AM, Reidy K, Palma-Dias R. The Contribution of MRI after fetal anomalies have been diagnosed by ultrasound: correlation with postnatal outcomes. Fetal Diagn Ther. 2015;38:186–94.10.1159/000380821Suche in Google Scholar PubMed

[38] Pearce R, Baardsnes J. Term MRI for small preterm babies: do parents really want to know and why has nobody asked them? Acta Paediatr. 2012;101:1013–5.10.1111/j.1651-2227.2012.02767.xSuche in Google Scholar PubMed

[39] Keraudren K, Kuklisova-Murgasova M, Kyriakopoulou V, Malamateniou C, Rutherford MA, Kainz B, et al. Automated fetal brain segmentation from 2D MRI slices for motion correction. Neuroimage 2014;101:633–43.10.1016/j.neuroimage.2014.07.023Suche in Google Scholar PubMed

[40] Malin G, Anblagan D, Bugg G, Gowland P, Jones N, Robinson R. PFM.39 Diagnostic accuracy of antenatal magnetic resonance imaging (MRI) to predict birth weight >90th centile or <10th centile in the third trimester. Arch Dis Child Fetal Neonatal Ed. 2014;99(Suppl 1):A94–5.10.1136/archdischild-2014-306576.269Suche in Google Scholar

[41] Malin G, Bugg G, Takwoingi Y, Thornton J, Jones N. PFM.48 Comparison of MRI and ultrasound to detect fetal macrosomia at term: a systematic review and meta-analysis. Arch Dis Child Fetal Neonatal Ed. 2014;99(Suppl 1):A97–100.10.1136/archdischild-2014-306576.278Suche in Google Scholar

[42] Meyers ML, Mirsky DM, Dannull KA, Tong S, Crombleholme TM. Effects of maternal valium administration on fetal MRI motion artifact: a comparison study at high altitude. Fetal Diagn Ther. 2016;42:124–9.10.1159/000450978Suche in Google Scholar PubMed

[43] Malamateniou C, Malik SJ, Counsell SJ, Allsop JM, McGuinness AK, Hayat T, et al. Motion-compensation techniques in neonatal and fetal MR imaging. AJNR Am J Neuroradiol. 2013;34:1124–36.10.3174/ajnr.A3128Suche in Google Scholar PubMed PubMed Central

Received: 2016-11-07
Accepted: 2017-08-31
Published Online: 2017-10-14
Published in Print: 2018-11-27

©2018 Walter de Gruyter GmbH, Berlin/Boston

Artikel in diesem Heft

  1. Frontmatter
  2. Editorial
  3. Fetal anomalies – From prenatal diagnosis to therapy
  4. Corner of Academy
  5. The first trimester aneuploidy biochemical markers in IVF/ICSI patients have no additional benefit compared to spontaneous conceptions in the prediction of pregnancy complications
  6. Research articles – Obstetrics
  7. Assessment of strain and dyssynchrony in normal fetuses using speckle tracking echocardiography – comparison of three different ultrasound probes
  8. Inborn errors of metabolism in a cohort of pregnancies with non-immune hydrops fetalis: a single center experience
  9. Cytogenetic analysis in fetuses with late onset abnormal sonographic findings
  10. Fetal MRI, lower acceptance by women in research vs. clinical setting
  11. Neurological complications after therapy for fetal-fetal transfusion syndrome: a systematic review of the outcomes at 24 months
  12. Evaluation of management and surgical outcomes in pregnancies complicated by acute cholecystitis
  13. Pentaerythrityltetranitrate (PETN) improves utero- and feto-placental Doppler parameters in pregnancies with impaired utero-placental perfusion in mid-gestation – a secondary analysis of the PETN-pilot trial
  14. Early onset preeclampsia is associated with an elevated mean platelet volume (MPV) and a greater rise in MPV from time of booking compared with pregnant controls: results of the CAPE study
  15. Effect of maternal age, height, BMI and ethnicity on birth weight: an Italian multicenter study
  16. Risk factors and classification of stillbirth in a Middle Eastern population: a retrospective study
  17. Selective IUGR in dichorionic twins: what can Doppler assessment and growth discordancy say about neonatal outcomes?
  18. Early fetal megacystis: Is it possible to predict the prognosis in the first trimester?
  19. Research articles – Fetus
  20. A poor long-term neurological prognosis is associated with abnormal cord insertion in severe growth-restricted fetuses
  21. Birth-weight centiles and the risk of serious adverse neonatal outcomes at term
  22. Short communication
  23. Maternal and neonatal vitamin D deficiency and transient tachypnea of the newborn in full term neonates
  24. Acknowledgment
https://doi.org/10.1515/jpm-2016-0360
Schlagwörter für diesen Artikel
Acceptance; CNS; fetal brain; fetal MRI; image quality; sedatives

Artikel in diesem Heft

  1. Frontmatter
  2. Editorial
  3. Fetal anomalies – From prenatal diagnosis to therapy
  4. Corner of Academy
  5. The first trimester aneuploidy biochemical markers in IVF/ICSI patients have no additional benefit compared to spontaneous conceptions in the prediction of pregnancy complications
  6. Research articles – Obstetrics
  7. Assessment of strain and dyssynchrony in normal fetuses using speckle tracking echocardiography – comparison of three different ultrasound probes
  8. Inborn errors of metabolism in a cohort of pregnancies with non-immune hydrops fetalis: a single center experience
  9. Cytogenetic analysis in fetuses with late onset abnormal sonographic findings
  10. Fetal MRI, lower acceptance by women in research vs. clinical setting
  11. Neurological complications after therapy for fetal-fetal transfusion syndrome: a systematic review of the outcomes at 24 months
  12. Evaluation of management and surgical outcomes in pregnancies complicated by acute cholecystitis
  13. Pentaerythrityltetranitrate (PETN) improves utero- and feto-placental Doppler parameters in pregnancies with impaired utero-placental perfusion in mid-gestation – a secondary analysis of the PETN-pilot trial
  14. Early onset preeclampsia is associated with an elevated mean platelet volume (MPV) and a greater rise in MPV from time of booking compared with pregnant controls: results of the CAPE study
  15. Effect of maternal age, height, BMI and ethnicity on birth weight: an Italian multicenter study
  16. Risk factors and classification of stillbirth in a Middle Eastern population: a retrospective study
  17. Selective IUGR in dichorionic twins: what can Doppler assessment and growth discordancy say about neonatal outcomes?
  18. Early fetal megacystis: Is it possible to predict the prognosis in the first trimester?
  19. Research articles – Fetus
  20. A poor long-term neurological prognosis is associated with abnormal cord insertion in severe growth-restricted fetuses
  21. Birth-weight centiles and the risk of serious adverse neonatal outcomes at term
  22. Short communication
  23. Maternal and neonatal vitamin D deficiency and transient tachypnea of the newborn in full term neonates
  24. Acknowledgment
Jetzt anmelden und 20% sparen
Institutioneller Zugang
Wie funktioniert Authentifizierung?
Haben Sie eine Idee, wie wir unsere Website verbessern können?
Bitte schreiben Sie uns.
© 2025 De Gruyter Brill
Heruntergeladen am 22.9.2025 von https://www.degruyterbrill.com/document/doi/10.1515/jpm-2016-0360/html
Button zum nach oben scrollen