Kadji Caroline, De Groof Maxime, Camus Margaux F, De Angelis Riccardo, Fellas Stéphanie, Klass Magdalena, Cecotti Vera, Dütemeyer Vivien, Barakat Elie, Cannie Mieke M, Jani Jacques C
Department of Obstetrics and Gynecology, University Hospital Brugmann, Université Libre de Bruxelles, Brussels, Belgium.
Fetal Diagn Ther. 2017;41(4):307-313. doi: 10.1159/000448950. Epub 2017 Mar 30.
The aim of this study was to apply a semi-automated calculation method of fetal body volume and, thus, of magnetic resonance-estimated fetal weight (MR-EFW) prior to planned delivery and to evaluate whether the technique of measurement could be simplified while remaining accurate.
MR-EFW was calculated using a semi-automated method at 38.6 weeks of gestation in 36 patients and compared to the picture archiving and communication system (PACS). Per patient, 8 sequences were acquired with a slice thickness of 4-8 mm and an intersection gap of 0, 4, 8, 12, 16, or 20 mm. The median absolute relative errors for MR-EFW and the time of planimetric measurements were calculated for all 8 sequences and for each method (assisted vs. PACS), and the difference between the methods was calculated.
The median delivery weight was 3,280 g. The overall median relative error for all 288 MR-EFW calculations was 2.4% using the semi-automated method and 2.2% for the PACS method. Measurements did not differ between the 8 sequences using the assisted method (p = 0.313) or the PACS (p = 0.118), while the time of planimetric measurement decreased significantly with a larger gap (p < 0.001) and in the assisted method compared to the PACS method (p < 0.01).
Our simplified MR-EFW measurement showed a dramatic decrease in time of planimetric measurement without a decrease in the accuracy of weight estimates.
本研究的目的是在计划分娩前应用一种胎儿身体体积的半自动计算方法，从而计算磁共振估计胎儿体重（MR-EFW），并评估测量技术在保持准确性的同时是否可以简化。
在36例患者妊娠38.6周时使用半自动方法计算MR-EFW，并与图像存档与通信系统（PACS）进行比较。每位患者采集8个序列，层厚为4-8mm，层间距为0、4、8、12、16或20mm。计算所有8个序列以及每种方法（辅助方法与PACS）的MR-EFW和面积测量时间的中位数绝对相对误差，并计算两种方法之间的差异。
中位分娩体重为3280g。使用半自动方法进行的所有288次MR-EFW计算的总体中位数相对误差为2.4%，PACS方法为2.2%。使用辅助方法（p = 0.313）或PACS（p = 0.118）时，8个序列之间的测量结果没有差异，而面积测量时间随着层间距增大（p < 0.001）以及与PACS方法相比在辅助方法中显著减少（p < 0.01）。
我们简化的MR-EFW测量显示面积测量时间显著减少，而体重估计的准确性没有降低。
