Department of Obstetrics and Gynecology, University Hospital Brugmann, Brussels, Belgium.
Department of Radiology, University Hospital Brugmann, Brussels, Belgium.
Ultrasound Obstet Gynecol. 2018 Aug;52(2):250-257. doi: 10.1002/uog.17523. Epub 2018 Jul 11.
To evaluate the performance of a simple semi-automated method for estimation of fetal weight (EFW) using magnetic resonance imaging (MRI) as compared with two-dimensional (2D) ultrasound (US) for the prediction of large-for-dates neonates.
Data of two groups of women with singleton pregnancy between March 2011 and May 2016 were retrieved from our database and evaluated retrospectively: the first group included women who underwent US-EFW and MRI-EFW within 48 h before delivery and the second group included women who had these evaluations between 35 + 0 weeks and 37 + 6 weeks of gestation, more than 48 h before delivery. US-EFW was based on Hadlock et al. and MRI-EFW on the formula described by Baker et al. For MRI-EFW, planimetric measurement of the fetal body volume (FBV) was performed using a semi-automated method and the time required for measurement was noted. Outcome measure was the performance of MRI-EFW vs US-EFW in the prediction of large-for-dates neonates, both ≤ 48 h and > 48 h before delivery. Receiver-operating characteristics (ROC) curves for each method were compared using the DeLong method.
Of the 270 women included in the first group, 48 (17.8%) newborns had birth weight ≥ 90 centile and 30 (11.1%) ≥ 95 centile. The second group included 83 women, and nine (10.8%) newborns had birth weight ≥ 95 centile. Median time needed for FBV planimetric measurements in all 353 fetuses was 3.5 (range, 1.5-5.5) min. The area under the ROC curve (AUC) for prediction of large-for-dates neonates by prenatal MRI performed within 48 h before delivery was significantly higher than that by US (for birth weight ≥ 90 centile, difference between AUCs = 0.085, standard error (SE) = 0.020, P < 0.001; for birth weight ≥ 95 centile, difference between AUCs = 0.036, SE = 0.014, P = 0.01). Similarly, MRI-EFW was better than US-EFW in predicting birth weight ≥ 95 centile when both examinations were performed > 48 h prior to delivery (difference between AUCs = 0.077, SE = 0.039, P = 0.045).
MRI planimetry using our purpose-designed semi-automated method is not time-consuming. The predictive performance of MRI-EFW performed immediately prior to or remote from delivery is significantly better than that of US-EFW for the prediction of large-for-dates neonates. Copyright © 2017 ISUOG. Published by John Wiley & Sons Ltd.
评估一种使用磁共振成像(MRI)估算胎儿体重(EFW)的简单半自动方法的性能,与二维超声(US)相比,用于预测大于胎龄儿。
我们从数据库中检索了 2011 年 3 月至 2016 年 5 月期间两组单胎妊娠妇女的数据,并进行回顾性分析:第一组包括在分娩前 48 小时内接受 US-EFW 和 MRI-EFW 的妇女,第二组包括在 35+0 周至 37+6 周妊娠期间进行这些评估的妇女,在分娩前 48 小时以上。US-EFW 基于 Hadlock 等人的公式,MRI-EFW 基于 Baker 等人的公式。对于 MRI-EFW,使用半自动方法对胎儿体体积(FBV)进行平面测量,并记录测量所需的时间。结局测量是 MRI-EFW 与 US-EFW 在预测大于胎龄儿中的表现,均≤48 小时和>48 小时前分娩。使用 DeLong 方法比较每种方法的受试者工作特征(ROC)曲线。
在第一组 270 名妇女中,48 名(17.8%)新生儿出生体重≥第 90 百分位,30 名(11.1%)≥第 95 百分位。第二组包括 83 名妇女,9 名(10.8%)新生儿出生体重≥第 95 百分位。所有 353 例胎儿的 FBV 平面测量中位数时间为 3.5(范围,1.5-5.5)分钟。在分娩前 48 小时内进行的产前 MRI 预测大于胎龄儿的 ROC 曲线下面积(AUC)明显高于 US(对于出生体重≥第 90 百分位,AUC 之间的差异=0.085,标准误差(SE)=0.020,P<0.001;对于出生体重≥第 95 百分位,AUC 之间的差异=0.036,SE=0.014,P=0.01)。同样,当两次检查均在分娩前>48 小时进行时,MRI-EFW 预测出生体重≥第 95 百分位的表现优于 US-EFW(AUC 之间的差异=0.077,SE=0.039,P=0.045)。
使用我们专门设计的半自动方法进行 MRI 平面测量并不耗时。MRI-EFW 在分娩前即刻或远离分娩时的预测性能明显优于 US-EFW,用于预测大于胎龄儿。版权所有©2017 ISUOG。由 John Wiley & Sons Ltd 出版。