|
1
|
Mckinnon K, Kendall GS, Tann CJ, Dyet L, Sokolska M, Baruteau KP, Marlow N, Robertson NJ, Peebles D, Srinivasan L. Biometric assessments of the posterior fossa by fetal MRI: A systematic review. Prenat Diagn 2020; 41:258-270. [PMID: 33251640 DOI: 10.1002/pd.5874] [Citation(s) in RCA: 2] [Impact Index Per Article: 0.5] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 06/02/2020] [Revised: 10/07/2020] [Accepted: 11/19/2020] [Indexed: 12/12/2022]
Abstract
BACKGROUND Posterior fossa abnormalities (PFAs) are commonly identified within routine screening and are a frequent indication for fetal magnetic resonance imaging (MRI). Although biometric measurements of the posterior fossa (PF) are established on fetal ultrasound and MRI, qualitative visual assessments are predominantly used to differentiate PFAs. OBJECTIVES This systematic review aimed to assess 2-dimensional (2D) biometric measurements currently in use for assessing the PF on fetal MRI to delineate different PFAs. METHODS The protocol was registered (PROSPERO ID CRD42019142162). Eligible studies included T2-weighted MRI PF measurements in fetuses with and without PFAs, including measurements of the PF, or other brain areas relevant to PFAs. RESULTS 59 studies were included - 6859 fetuses had 62 2D PF and related measurements. These included linear, area and angular measurements, representing measures of PF size, cerebellum/vermis, brainstem, and supratentorial measurements. 11 measurements were used in 10 or more studies and at least 1200 fetuses. These dimensions were used to characterise normal for gestational age, diagnose a range of pathologies, and predict outcome. CONCLUSION A selection of validated 2D biometric measurements of the PF on fetal MRI may be useful for identification of PFA in different clinical settings. Consistent use of these measures, both clinically and for research, is recommended.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Katie Mckinnon
- Neonatal Department, University College London Hospitals NHS Foundation Trust, London, UK.,Institute for Women's Health, University College London, London, UK
| | - Giles S Kendall
- Neonatal Department, University College London Hospitals NHS Foundation Trust, London, UK.,Institute for Women's Health, University College London, London, UK
| | - Cally J Tann
- Neonatal Department, University College London Hospitals NHS Foundation Trust, London, UK.,MARCH Centre, London School of Hygiene and Tropical Medicine, London, UK
| | - Leigh Dyet
- Neonatal Department, University College London Hospitals NHS Foundation Trust, London, UK.,Institute for Women's Health, University College London, London, UK
| | - Magdalena Sokolska
- Institute for Women's Health, University College London, London, UK.,Medical Physics Department, University College London Hospitals NHS Foundation Trust, London, UK
| | - Kelly Pegoretti Baruteau
- Institute for Women's Health, University College London, London, UK.,Radiology Department, University College London Hospitals NHS Foundation Trust, London, UK
| | - Neil Marlow
- Neonatal Department, University College London Hospitals NHS Foundation Trust, London, UK.,Institute for Women's Health, University College London, London, UK
| | - Nicola J Robertson
- Neonatal Department, University College London Hospitals NHS Foundation Trust, London, UK.,Institute for Women's Health, University College London, London, UK
| | - Donald Peebles
- Institute for Women's Health, University College London, London, UK.,Obstetric Department, University College London Hospitals NHS Foundation Trust, London, UK
| | - Latha Srinivasan
- Neonatal Department, University College London Hospitals NHS Foundation Trust, London, UK.,Institute for Women's Health, University College London, London, UK
| |
Collapse
|