medigraphic.com
Federación Mexicana de Ginecología y Obstetricia, A.C.

2022, Number 08

<< Back Next >>

Ginecol Obstet Mex 2022; 90 (08)

Usefulness of magnetic resonance as a complementary imaging study to ultrasound in the diagnosis of fetal malformations. Experience in two Maternal-fetal Medicine centers in Latin America

Molina-Giraldo S, Correa-Mendoza D, Castillo-Toro JP, Malagón C, Gómez-Bossa M, Pérez-Olivo JL

Language: Spanish
References: 22
Page: 655-663
PDF size: 350.00 Kb.


ABSTRACT

Objetive: To know the contributions of magnetic resonance imaging, as a complementary study to ultrasound, in the diagnosis of fetal malformations in the central nervous system, musculoskeletal and thorax in two units of Maternal Fetal Medicine.
Materials and Methods: Retrospective, observational and comparative crosssectional study, based on the review of medical records recorded during three years of patients with more than 18 weeks of pregnancy referred to the Maternal Fetal Medicine Unit of Hospital San José and Clínica Colsubsidio, for any fetal structural malformation identified in the central nervous system, musculoskeletal and thorax diagnosed based on ultrasonography.
Results: We reviewed 109 clinical histories of pregnant patients with fetuses diagnosed with congenital malformation by ultrasound. The most frequent indications were abnormalities of the central nervous system in 61.5%: non-communicating hydrocephalus in 36.6% by ultrasound and 21% by MRI, followed by those of the thorax with 40.4% by ultrasound and 36.7 by MRI and malformations of the musculoskeletal system 20.1% by ultrasound and 2.8% by MRI. The diagnostic agreement between ultrasound and postnatal diagnosis was 66% and that of MRI was 76%. Compared to initial ultrasound, MRI increased the frequency of diagnosis of fetal malformation.
Conclusion: MRI, complementary to ultrasound diagnosis of congenital malformations, was more notable in the central nervous and musculoskeletal systems where it allowed improving the characterization of the alterations detected by ultrasound.


REFERENCES

  1. Santos XM, Papanna R, Johnson A, Cass DL, et al. The use ofcombined ultrasound and magnetic resonance imaging inthe detection of fetal anomalies. Prenatal Diagnosis 2010;30 (5): 402-7. https://doi.org/10.1002/pd.2481

  2. Chitty LS, Hunt GH, Moore J, Lobb MO. Effectiveness ofroutine ultrasonography in detecting fetal structural abnormalitiesin a low risk population. BMJ 1991; 303 (6811):1165-9. https://doi.org/10.1136/bmj.303.6811.1165

  3. Cunningham FG, Leveno KJ, Bloom SL, Hauth JC, et al. FetalImaging Williams Obstetrics. 23 ed. New York: McGraw-Hill, 2010; 350.

  4. Fernández Toral J, Hernández C, Málaga Guerrero S. Síndromespolimalformativos. En: Sánchez Villares E, editor.Pediatría Básica. Madrid: Idepsa, 1980; 51-8.

  5. Donoso Bernales B, Oyarzún Ebensperger E. Anomalíascongénitas. Medwave 2012; 12 (9): e5537. https://doi.org/10.5867/medwave.2012.09.5537

  6. Johnson MA. Overview of obstetric sonography. In: RumackCM, Wilson SR, Charboneau JW, editors. Diagnostic Ultrasound.2th. Mosby-YearBook, 1998; 961-73.

  7. Instituto Nacional de Salud. Informe de eventos de defectoscongénitos en Colombia 2018. www.ins.gov.co

  8. Grandjean H, Larroque D, Levi S. The performance ofroutine ultrasonographic screening of pregnancies inthe Eurofetus Study. Am J Obstet Gynecol 1999; 181 (2):446-54. https://doi.org/10.1016/s0002-9378(99)70577-6

  9. Molina-Giraldo S, Alfonso-Ospina L, Parra-Meza C, Lancheros-Garcia EA, et al. Prevalencia de malformaciones congenitasdiagnosticadas por ultrasonido: tres anos de experienciaen una unidad de medicina materno fetal universitaria.Ginecol Obstet Mex 2015; 83 (11): 680-9. Epub 2016/06/18.

  10. Smith FW, Adam AH, Phillips WD. NMR imaging in pregnancy.Lancet 1983; 1 (8314-5): 61-2. https://doi.org/10.1016/S0140-6736(83)91588-X

  11. Kiefer B, Grassner J, Hausman R. Image acquisition in asecond with half Fourier acquisition single- shot turbospin-echo. J Magn Reson Imaging 1994; 4: 86-7.

  12. Meng X, Xie L, Song W. Comparing the diagnostic value ofultrasound and magnetic resonance imaging for placentaaccreta: a systematic review and meta-analysis. Ultrasoundin Medicine & Biology. 2013; 39 (11): 1958-65. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ultrasmedbio.2013.05.017

  13. Sánchez R, Castellot A, Enríquez G, Carreras E, et al.Resonancia magnética en el diagnóstico prenatal de malformacionescongénitas. Bol Pediatr 2001; 41 (175): 9-16.

  14. Bermejo Sánchez E. Frecuencias de defectos congénitosal nacimiento en España y su comportamiento temporal ypor comunidades autónomas. Causas de las variaciones delas frecuencias. SEMERGEN 2010; 36 (8): 449-55. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.semerg.2010.07.001

  15. Tee LM, Kan EY, Cheung JC, Leung WC. Magnetic resonanceimaging of the fetal brain. Hong Kong MedicalJournal 2016; 22 (3): 270-8. https://doi.org/ 10.12809/hkmj154678

  16. Wang G, Shan R, Zhao L, Zhu X, et al. Fetal cleft lipwith and without cleft palate: comparison betweenMR imaging and US for prenatal diagnosis. Eur J Radiology2011; 79 (3): 437-42. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ejrad.2010.03.026

  17. Blaicher W, Mittermayer C, Messerschmidt A, DeutingerJ, et al. Fetal skeletal deformities. The diagnostic accuracyof prenatal ultrasonography and fetal magnetic resonanceimaging. Ultraschall Med 2004; 25 (3): 195-9. https://doi.org/ 10.1055/s-2004-812946

  18. Malinger G, Ben-Sira L, Lev D, Ben-Aroya Z, et al. Fetalbrain imaging: a comparison between magnetic resonanceimaging and dedicated neurosonography. Ultrasound inObstetrics & Gynecology 2004; 23 (4): 333-40. https://doi.org/ 10.1002/uog.1016

  19. Levine D, Barnes PD, Madsen JR, Li W, et al. Fetal centralnervous system anomalies: MR imaging augments sonographicdiagnosis. Radiology 1997; 204 (3): 635-42. https://doi.org/10.1148/radiology.204.3.9280237

  20. Peruzzi P, Corbitt RJ, Raffel C. Magnetic resonanceimaging versus ultrasonography for the in utero evaluationof central nervous system anomalies. J NeurosurgeryPediatrics 2010; 6 (4): 340-5. https://doi.org/10.3171/2010.7.PEDS09511

  21. Molina-Giraldo S, Avellaneda-Salamanca AC, López-GómezAC, et al. Perinatal outcome of fetal pulmonary pathologyin relation to pulmonary volume measured with nuclearmagnetic resonance. Obstet Gynecol Int J 2022; 13 (3):146-49. doi: 10.15406/ogij.2022.13.00640

  22. Molina-Giraldo S, Parra Linares AM, Castellanos MontañaMA, et al. Characterization of Lesions in the Central NervousSystem Based on Neurosonography and MagneticReso- nance in Fetus with Isolated Congenital Heart Defects.A Systematic Review. Pregn Womens Health Care IntJ 2022; 2 (1): 1-15.




2020     |     www.medigraphic.com