Download PDF
Ultraschall Med 2018; 39(05): 513-525
DOI: 10.1055/s-0043-113820
Original Article
© Georg Thieme Verlag KG Stuttgart · New York

Added Value of Fetal MRI in the Evaluation of Fetal Anomalies of the Corpus Callosum: A Retrospective Analysis of 78 Cases

Mehrwert der fetalen MRT bei der Beurteilung von Corpus-callosum-Anomalien beim Feten: Eine retrospektive Analyse von 78 Fällen
Mirra Manevich-Mazor   *
1   Obstetrics and Gynecology, Sheba Medical Center at Tel Hashomer, Israel
,
Alina Weissmann-Brenner   *
1   Obstetrics and Gynecology, Sheba Medical Center at Tel Hashomer, Israel
,
Omer Bar Yosef
2   Pediatric Neurology, Sheba Medical Center at Tel Hashomer, Israel
,
Chen Hoffmann
3   Department of Radiology, Sheba Medical Center at Tel Hashomer, Israel
,
Roei David Mazor
1   Obstetrics and Gynecology, Sheba Medical Center at Tel Hashomer, Israel
,
Mariela Mosheva
4   Pediatric Psychiatry, Sheba Medical Center at Tel Hashomer, Israel
,
Reuven Ryszard Achiron
1   Obstetrics and Gynecology, Sheba Medical Center at Tel Hashomer, Israel
,
Eldad Katorza
1   Obstetrics and Gynecology, Sheba Medical Center at Tel Hashomer, Israel
› Author Affiliations
Further Information

Publication History

19 May 2016

10 May 2017

Publication Date:
07 June 2018 (online)

Also available at
    Permissions and Reprints

Corrected by:

Added Value of Fetal MRI in the Evaluation of Fetal Anomalies of the Corpus Callosum: A Retrospective Analysis of 78 CasesUltraschall Med 2018; 39(05): 513-525
DOI: 10.1055/a-0838-9055

Abstract

Objective To evaluate the added value of fetal MRI to ultrasound in detecting and specifying callosal anomalies, and its impact on clinical decision making.

Methods Fetuses with a sonographic diagnosis of an anomalous corpus callosum (CC) who underwent a subsequent fetal brain MRI between 2010 and 2015 were retrospectively evaluated and classified according to the severity of the findings. The findings detected on ultrasound were compared to those detected on MRI. An analysis was performed to assess whether fetal MRI altered the group classification, and thus the management of these pregnancies.

Results 78 women were recruited following sonographic diagnoses of either complete or partial callosal agenesis, short, thin or thick CC. Normal MRI studies were obtained inµ19 cases (24 %). Among these, all children available for follow-up received an adequate adaptive score in their Vineland II adaptive behavior scale assessment. Analysis of the concordance between US and MRI demonstrated a substantial level of agreement for complete callosal agenesis (kappa: 0.742), moderate agreement for thin CC (kappa: 0.418) and fair agreement for all other callosal anomalies. Comparison between US and MRI-based mild/severe findings classifications revealed that MRI contributed to a change in the management for 28 fetuses (35.9 %), mostly (25 fetuses, 32.1 %) in favor of pregnancy preservation.

Conclusion Fetal MRI effectively detects callosal anomalies and enables satisfactory validation of the presence or absence of callosal anomalies identified by ultrasound and adds valuable data that improves clinical decision making.

Zusammenfassung

Methoden Feten mit sonografischer Diagnose von Corpus callosum (CC) Anomalien und anschließender fetaler Schädel-MRT zwischen 2010 und 2015 wurden retrospektiv evaluiert und nach dem Schweregrad der Befunde klassifiziert. Die im Ultraschall erhobenen Befunde wurden mit denen der MRT verglichen. Um zu beurteilen, ob die fetale MRT die Gruppenklassifikation und somit auch das Management dieser Schwangerschaften ändert, wurde eine Analyse durchgeführt.

Ergebnisse Es wurden 78 Frauen mit sonografischer Diagnose einer kompletten oder partiellen Corpus-callosum-Agenesie rekrutiert, mit kurzem, dünnem oder dickem CC. Normale MRT- Ergebnisse lagen in 9 Fällen (24 %) vor. Von diesen erreichten alle Kinder, die zur Nachuntersuchung zur Verfügung standen, einen zufriedenstellenden Score bezüglich des Anpassungsverhaltens im „Vineland-II-Adaptive Behaviour Scales“. Die Analyse der Konkordanz zwischen US und MRT zeigte, dass der Grad der Übereinstimmung bei kompletter Balkenagenesie erheblich (kappa: 0,742), bei dünnem CC moderat (kappa: 0,418) und für alle anderen Balkenanomalien gut war. Der Vergleich zwischen den Befundklassifikationen basierend auf US und MRT zeigte, dass die MRT zu einer Veränderung im Management von 28 Feten (35,9 %) beigetragen hat, in den meisten Fällen (25 Feten; 32,1 %) zu Gunsten der Fortsetzung der Schwangerschaft.

Schlussfolgerung Die fetale MRT erkennt effektiv Corpus-callosum-Anomalien und ermöglicht eine zufriedenstellende Bewertung bei Verdacht auf Balkenagenesie im Ultraschall und liefert wertvolle Informationen, die zu einer besseren klinische Entscheidungsfindung beitragen.

Key words

pregnancy management - CNS anomalies - fetal ultrasound - fetal MRI - corpus callosum

* These authors contributed equally to the article.


 

  • References

  • 1 Lerman-Sagie T, Ben-Sira L, Achiron R. et al. Thick fetal corpus callosum: an ominous sign?. Ultrasound in obstetrics & gynecology: the official journal of the International Society of Ultrasound in Obstetrics and Gynecology 2009; 34: 55-61 Epub 2009/05/19
    PubMedSearch in Google Scholar
  • 2 Vazquez E, Mayolas N, Delgado I. et al. Fetal neuroimaging: US and MRI. Pediatric radiology 2009; 39 (Suppl. 03) 422-435 Epub 2009/05/19
    PubMedSearch in Google Scholar
  • 3 Volpe P, Campobasso G, De Robertis V. et al. Disorders of prosencephalic development. Prenatal diagnosis 2009; 29: 340-354 Epub 2009/02/03
    CrossrefPubMedSearch in Google Scholar
  • 4 Mangione R, Fries N, Godard P. et al. Neurodevelopmental outcome following prenatal diagnosis of an isolated anomaly of the corpus callosum. Ultrasound in obstetrics & gynecology: the official journal of the International Society of Ultrasound in Obstetrics and Gynecology 2011; 37: 290-295 Epub 2011/02/22
    CrossrefPubMedSearch in Google Scholar
  • 5 Koob M, Weingertner AS, Gasser B. et al. Thick corpus callosum: a clue to the diagnosis of fetal septopreoptic holoprosencephaly?. Pediatric radiology 2012; 42: 886-890 Epub 2011/10/19
    CrossrefPubMedSearch in Google Scholar
  • 6 Ruland AM, Berg C, Gembruch U. et al. Prenatal Diagnosis of Anomalies of the Corpus Callosum over a 13-Year Period. Ultraschall in Med 2016; 37: 598-603 Epub 2015/06/27. Pranatale Diagnostik von Corpus-Callosum-Anomalien in einem 13 Jahreszeitraum
    Thieme ConnectPubMedSearch in Google Scholar
  • 7 Moutard ML, Kieffer V, Feingold J. et al. Isolated corpus callosum agenesis: a ten-year follow-up after prenatal diagnosis (how are the children without corpus callosum at 10 years of age?). Prenatal diagnosis 2012; 32: 277-283 Epub 2012/03/21
    CrossrefPubMedSearch in Google Scholar
  • 8 Guibaud L. Contribution of fetal cerebral MRI for diagnosis of structural anomalies. Prenatal diagnosis 2009; 29: 420-433 Epub 2009/01/22
    CrossrefPubMedSearch in Google Scholar
  • 9 Tercanli S, Prufer F. Fetal Neurosonogaphy: Ultrasound and Magnetic Resonance Imaging in Competition. Ultraschall in Med 2016; 37: 555-557 Epub 2016/12/16. Fetale Neurosonographie: Ultraschall und Magnetresonanztomographie im Wettbewerb
    Thieme ConnectPubMedSearch in Google Scholar
  • 10 Blondiaux E, Garel C. Fetal cerebral imaging – ultrasound vs. MRI: an update. Acta Radiol 2013; 54: 1046-1054 Epub 2012/09/27
    CrossrefPubMedSearch in Google Scholar
  • 11 Pashaj S, Merz E. Detection of Fetal Corpus Callosum Abnormalities by Means of 3D Ultrasound. Ultraschall in Med 2016; 37: 185-194 Epub 2015/11/04
    Thieme ConnectPubMedSearch in Google Scholar
  • 12 Achiron R, Achiron A. Development of the human fetal corpus callosum: a high-resolution, cross-sectional sonographic study. Ultrasound Obstet Gynecol 2001; 18: 343-347 Epub 2002/01/10
    CrossrefPubMedSearch in Google Scholar
  • 13 Malinger G, Monteagudo A, Timor-Tritsch I. et al. Sonographic examination of the fetal central nervous system: guidelines for performing the “basic examination” and the “fetal neurosonogram”. Ultrasound in obstetrics & gynecology: the official journal of the International Society of Ultrasound in Obstetrics and Gynecology 2007; 29: 109-116 . doi.org/10.1002/uog.3909
    CrossrefPubMedSearch in Google Scholar
  • 14 Gat I, Hoffmann C, Shashar D. et al. Fetal Brain MRI: Novel Classification and Contribution to Sonography. Ultraschall in Med 2016; 37: 176-184 Epub 2014/12/24. MRT des fetalen Gehirns: Neuklassifizierung und Unterstutzung der Sonografie
    Thieme ConnectPubMedSearch in Google Scholar
  • 15 Tilea B, Alberti C, Adamsbaum C. et al. Cerebral biometry in fetal magnetic resonance imaging: new reference data. Ultrasound in obstetrics & gynecology: the official journal of the International Society of Ultrasound in Obstetrics and Gynecology 2009; 33: 173-181 Epub 2009/01/28
    CrossrefPubMedSearch in Google Scholar
  • 16 Harreld JH, Bhore R, Chason DP. et al. Corpus callosum length by gestational age as evaluated by fetal MR imaging. AJNR American journal of neuroradiology 2011; 32: 490-494 Epub 2010/12/25
    CrossrefPubMedSearch in Google Scholar
  • 17 Volpe P, Paladini D, Resta M. et al. Characteristics, associations and outcome of partial agenesis of the corpus callosum in the fetus. Ultrasound in obstetrics & gynecology: the official journal of the International Society of Ultrasound in Obstetrics and Gynecology 2006; 27: 509-516 Epub 2006/04/19
    CrossrefPubMedSearch in Google Scholar
  • 18 Santo S, D'Antonio F, Homfray T. et al. Counseling in fetal medicine: agenesis of the corpus callosum. Ultrasound in obstetrics & gynecology: the official journal of the International Society of Ultrasound in Obstetrics and Gynecology 2012; 40: 513-521 Epub 2012/10/02
    CrossrefPubMedSearch in Google Scholar
  • 19 Sparrow SS. Vineland Adaptive Behavior Scales. In: Kreutzer JS, DeLuca J, Caplan B. (eds) Encyclopedia of Clinical Neuropsychology. 2nd. edition New York, NY: Springer; 2005: 2618-2621
    Search in Google Scholar
  • 20 Shinar S, Har-Tov J, Lerman-Sagie T. et al. A thick corpus callosum, visualized in the second trimester, can be transient and of uncertain significance. Ultrasound in obstetrics & gynecology: the official journal of the International Society of Ultrasound in Obstetrics and Gynecology 2016; 48: 452-457
    CrossrefPubMedSearch in Google Scholar
  • 21 Levine D, Barnes PD, Robertson RR. et al. Fast MR imaging of fetal central nervous system abnormalities. Radiology 2003; 229: 51-61 Epub 2003/08/16
    CrossrefPubMedSearch in Google Scholar
  • 22 Mitter C, Jakab A, Brugger PC. et al. Validation of In utero Tractography of Human Fetal Commissural and Internal Capsule Fibers with Histological Structure Tensor Analysis. Frontiers in neuroanatomy 2015; 9: 164 Epub 2016/01/07
    PubMedSearch in Google Scholar
  • 23 Sotiriadis A, Makrydimas G. Neurodevelopment after prenatal diagnosis of isolated agenesis of the corpus callosum: an integrative review. American journal of obstetrics and gynecology 2012; 206: 337 Epub 2012/01/31
    PubMedSearch in Google Scholar
  • 24 Garel C, Moutard ML. Main congenital cerebral anomalies: how prenatal imaging aids counseling. Fetal diagnosis and therapy 2014; 35: 229-239 Epub 2014/03/01
    CrossrefPubMedSearch in Google Scholar
  • 25 van Doorn M, Oude RengerinkK, Newsum EA. et al. Added value of fetal MRI in fetuses with suspected brain abnormalities on neurosonography: a systematic review and meta-analysis. The journal of maternal-fetal & neonatal medicine: the official journal of the European Association of Perinatal Medicine, the Federation of Asia and Oceania Perinatal Societies, the International Society of Perinatal Obstet 2016; 29: 2949-2961
    CrossrefPubMedSearch in Google Scholar
  • 26 Pier DB, Levine D, Kataoka ML. et al. Magnetic resonance volumetric assessments of brains in fetuses with ventriculomegaly correlated to outcomes. Journal of ultrasound in medicine: official journal of the American Institute of Ultrasound in Medicine 2011; 30: 595-603 Epub 2011/04/30
    PubMedSearch in Google Scholar
  • 27 Ichihashi K, Iino M, Eguchi Y. et al. Difference between left and right lateral ventricular sizes in neonates. Early human development 2002; 68: 55-64 Epub 2002/08/23
    CrossrefPubMedSearch in Google Scholar
  • 28 Malinger G, Ben-Sira L, Lev D. et al. Fetal brain imaging: a comparison between magnetic resonance imaging and dedicated neurosonography. Ultrasound in obstetrics & gynecology: the official journal of the International Society of Ultrasound in Obstetrics and Gynecology 2004; 23: 333-340 Epub 2004/04/06
    CrossrefPubMedSearch in Google Scholar
  • 29 Paladini D, Quarantelli M, Sglavo G. et al. Accuracy of neurosonography and MRI in clinical management of fetuses referred with central nervous system abnormalities. Ultrasound in obstetrics & gynecology: the official journal of the International Society of Ultrasound in Obstetrics and Gynecology 2014; 44: 188-196 Epub 2013/11/05
    PubMedSearch in Google Scholar
  • 30 Irwin K, Henry A, Gopikrishna S. et al. Utility of fetal MRI for workup of fetal central nervous system anomalies in an Australian maternal-fetal medicine cohort. The Australian & New Zealand journal of obstetrics & gynaecology 2016; 56: 267-273
    CrossrefPubMedSearch in Google Scholar