Prenatal diagnosis of musculoskeletal conditions

Accuracy of Multimodality Fetal Imaging (US, MRI, and CT) for Congenital Musculoskeletal Anomalies

BACKGROUND

Ultrasonography (US) is the first-line diagnostic tool used to assess fetal musculoskeletal (MSK) anomalies. Associated anomalies in other organ systems may benefit from evaluation via Magnetic Resonance Imaging (MRI). In this study, we compared the diagnostic accuracy of US and MRI to diagnose fetal MSK (primary objective) and non-MSK anomalies (secondary objective). We describe additional findings by low-dose computerized tomography (CT) in two cases incompletely characterized via US and MRI.

MATERIALS AND METHODS

This was an IRB-approved retrospective study of consecutive patients with suspected fetal MSK anomalies examined between December 2015 and June 2020. We compared individual MSK and non-MSK anomalies identified via US, MRI, and CT with postnatal outcomes. Sensitivity and specificity for US and MRI were calculated and compared.

RESULTS

A total of 31 patients with 112 MSK and 43 non-MSK anomalies were included. The sensitivity of MRI and US for MSK anomalies was not significantly different (76.6% vs. 61.3%, p = 0.3). Low-dose CT identified eight additional skeletal anomalies. MRI diagnosed a higher number of non-MSK anomalies compared to US (81.4% vs. 37.2%, p < 0.05).

CONCLUSIONS

Fetal MRI and US have comparable sensitivity for MSK anomalies. In selected cases, low-dose CT may provide additional information. Fetal MRI detected a larger number of non-MSK anomalies in other organ systems compared to US. Multimodality imaging combining all the information provided by MRI, US, and CT, if necessary, ultimately achieved a sensitivity of 89.2% (95% CI: 83.4% to 95.0%) for the diagnosis of musculoskeletal anomalies and 81.4% for additional anomalies in other organs and systems.

Prospective evaluation of parental anxiety related to newborn foot disorder

PURPOSE

The presence of a clubfoot is often found prenatally and some families seek counselling with a specialist. The purpose of this study was to compare the parental anxiety levels in families that: a) knew prenatally and had prenatal counselling; b) knew prenatally but did not seek prenatal counselling; and c) did not know until after delivery.

METHODS

This prospective cohort study evaluated the anxiety of parents as they presented to the paediatric orthopaedic clinic with their newborn with a foot disorder (prior to the diagnostic confirmation of clubfoot). Each family filled out the 'Pre-visit orthopaedic surgeon questionnaire' and then after the initial visit with the orthopaedic surgeon (confirming the clubfoot diagnosis) the family filled out the 'Immediately post-visit orthopaedic surgeon questionnaire'. Through these questionnaires, anxiety level was assessed prior to meeting postnatally with the paediatric orthopaedic specialist, as well as after the meeting and compared across groups.

RESULTS

A total of 121 parents completed questionnaires: 71% (86/121) confirmed clubfoot; 69% of families (59/86) received prenatal counselling (Group A); 16% (14/86) knew prenatally but had no counselling (Group B); and 15% (13/86) found out at birth (Group C). There was no difference in anxiety levels across groups before (p = 0.78) or after (p = 0.57) meeting with the paediatric orthopaedic surgeon; however, overall anxiety reduced significantly (p < 0.001).

CONCLUSION

We found no difference in the anxiety levels of across the three groups. Prenatal counselling for parents of children with likely clubfoot may not decrease parental anxiety, but nonetheless is very appreciated by the families who receive it.

LEVEL OF EVIDENCE

Prognostic Level II.