Neonatal Anthropometric Measurements: A Comparison of Neonates With 3-T Fetal MRI Exposure, With 1.5-T Fetal MRI Exposure, and Without In-Utero MRI Exposure.

IF 6.1 2区 医学 Q1 RADIOLOGY, NUCLEAR MEDICINE & MEDICAL IMAGING American Journal of Roentgenology Pub Date : 2024-11-01 Epub Date: 2024-11-20 DOI:10.2214/AJR.24.31647
Enrico Danzer, Valeria Peña-Trujillo, Sebastian Gallo-Bernal, Michael S Gee, Teresa Victoria
{"title":"Neonatal Anthropometric Measurements: A Comparison of Neonates With 3-T Fetal MRI Exposure, With 1.5-T Fetal MRI Exposure, and Without In-Utero MRI Exposure.","authors":"Enrico Danzer, Valeria Peña-Trujillo, Sebastian Gallo-Bernal, Michael S Gee, Teresa Victoria","doi":"10.2214/AJR.24.31647","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><p><b>BACKGROUND.</b> Fetal MRI is increasingly performed at 3 T. Nonetheless, safety concerns persist regarding potential increased risk of intrauterine growth restriction from in-utero 3-T MRI exposure. <b>OBJECTIVE.</b> The purpose of this study was to compare neonatal anthropometric measurements between neonates who underwent 3-T fetal MRI, neonates who underwent 1.5-T fetal MRI, and neonates without in-utero MRI exposure. <b>METHODS.</b> This single-center retrospective study included gravid patients who underwent fetal ultrasound and possible 1.5-T or 3-T fetal MRI within 10 days between January 2017 and January 2022. For each included patient who also underwent 3-T fetal MRI, one matched patient who also underwent 1.5-T MRI and two matched patients without in-utero MRI exposure were randomly selected. Matching was based on gestational age at the time of the fetal ultrasound. Neonatal anthropometric characteristics were compared among groups. <b>RESULTS.</b> The final sample included 416 patients (mean age, 32 ± 5 [SD] years), 104 in the 3-T MRI group, 104 in the 1.5-T MRI group, and 208 in the MRI-unexposed group. The mean gestational age at the time of fetal ultrasound used for matching was 27 weeks 2 days in the 3-T group, 25 weeks 2 days in the 1.5-T group, and 26 weeks 0 days in the MRI-unexposed group (<i>p</i> = .07). The distribution of indications for fetal MRI was not significantly different between the 3-T and 1.5-T groups (<i>p</i> = .56). The mean gestational age at delivery was 37 weeks 5 days in the 3-T group, 38 weeks 0 days in the 1.5-T group, and 38 weeks 2 days in the unexposed group (<i>p</i> = .51). No significant difference was observed among the groups in mean neonatal weight (3 T: 3120 ± 753 [SD] g; 1.5 T: 3104 ± 704 g; unexposed: 2967 ± 614 g; <i>p</i> = .09), mean neonatal weight percentile (3 T: 45 ± 27 [SD]; 1.5 T: 42 ± 26; unexposed: 41 ± 24; <i>p</i> = .56), mean neonatal head circumference (3 T: 34 ± 3 [SD] cm; 1.5 T: 34 ± 3 cm; unexposed: 34 ± 2 cm; <i>p</i> = .05), or mean neonatal head circumference percentile (3 T: 48 ± 29 [SD]; 1.5 T: 42 ± 23; unexposed: 43 ± 30; <i>p</i> = .32). <b>CONCLUSION.</b> There were no significant differences in neonatal anthropometric measurements among neonates who underwent in-utero 3-T MRI, neonates who underwent in-utero 1.5-T MRI, and neonates without in-utero MRI exposure. <b>CLINICAL IMPACT.</b> The results support the safety of 3-T MRI with respect to the growth of the developing fetus.</p>","PeriodicalId":55529,"journal":{"name":"American Journal of Roentgenology","volume":" ","pages":"e2431647"},"PeriodicalIF":6.1000,"publicationDate":"2024-11-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"American Journal of Roentgenology","FirstCategoryId":"3","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.2214/AJR.24.31647","RegionNum":2,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"2024/11/20 0:00:00","PubModel":"Epub","JCR":"Q1","JCRName":"RADIOLOGY, NUCLEAR MEDICINE & MEDICAL IMAGING","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

BACKGROUND. Fetal MRI is increasingly performed at 3 T. Nonetheless, safety concerns persist regarding potential increased risk of intrauterine growth restriction from in-utero 3-T MRI exposure. OBJECTIVE. The purpose of this study was to compare neonatal anthropometric measurements between neonates who underwent 3-T fetal MRI, neonates who underwent 1.5-T fetal MRI, and neonates without in-utero MRI exposure. METHODS. This single-center retrospective study included gravid patients who underwent fetal ultrasound and possible 1.5-T or 3-T fetal MRI within 10 days between January 2017 and January 2022. For each included patient who also underwent 3-T fetal MRI, one matched patient who also underwent 1.5-T MRI and two matched patients without in-utero MRI exposure were randomly selected. Matching was based on gestational age at the time of the fetal ultrasound. Neonatal anthropometric characteristics were compared among groups. RESULTS. The final sample included 416 patients (mean age, 32 ± 5 [SD] years), 104 in the 3-T MRI group, 104 in the 1.5-T MRI group, and 208 in the MRI-unexposed group. The mean gestational age at the time of fetal ultrasound used for matching was 27 weeks 2 days in the 3-T group, 25 weeks 2 days in the 1.5-T group, and 26 weeks 0 days in the MRI-unexposed group (p = .07). The distribution of indications for fetal MRI was not significantly different between the 3-T and 1.5-T groups (p = .56). The mean gestational age at delivery was 37 weeks 5 days in the 3-T group, 38 weeks 0 days in the 1.5-T group, and 38 weeks 2 days in the unexposed group (p = .51). No significant difference was observed among the groups in mean neonatal weight (3 T: 3120 ± 753 [SD] g; 1.5 T: 3104 ± 704 g; unexposed: 2967 ± 614 g; p = .09), mean neonatal weight percentile (3 T: 45 ± 27 [SD]; 1.5 T: 42 ± 26; unexposed: 41 ± 24; p = .56), mean neonatal head circumference (3 T: 34 ± 3 [SD] cm; 1.5 T: 34 ± 3 cm; unexposed: 34 ± 2 cm; p = .05), or mean neonatal head circumference percentile (3 T: 48 ± 29 [SD]; 1.5 T: 42 ± 23; unexposed: 43 ± 30; p = .32). CONCLUSION. There were no significant differences in neonatal anthropometric measurements among neonates who underwent in-utero 3-T MRI, neonates who underwent in-utero 1.5-T MRI, and neonates without in-utero MRI exposure. CLINICAL IMPACT. The results support the safety of 3-T MRI with respect to the growth of the developing fetus.

查看原文
分享 分享
微信好友 朋友圈 QQ好友 复制链接
本刊更多论文
新生儿人体测量:3T胎儿磁共振成像暴露、1.5T胎儿磁共振成像暴露和无子宫内磁共振成像暴露新生儿的比较。
背景:尽管如此,3T 磁共振成像对胎儿宫内生长受限的潜在风险增加的安全性担忧依然存在。研究目的比较接受 3 T 胎儿核磁共振成像的新生儿、接受 1.5 T 胎儿核磁共振成像的新生儿和未接受宫内核磁共振成像暴露的新生儿的人体测量数据。方法:这项单中心回顾性研究纳入了2017年1月至2022年1月期间10天内接受过胎儿超声检查和可能的1.5T或3T胎儿核磁共振成像检查的孕产妇患者。对于每一位接受过 3-T 胎儿核磁共振成像的患者,随机选取一名接受过 1.5-T 核磁共振成像的匹配患者和两名未接受过宫内核磁共振成像的匹配患者。匹配的依据是胎儿超声检查的胎龄。比较各组新生儿的人体测量特征。结果:最终样本包括416名患者(平均年龄为32±5岁),其中3T磁共振成像组104人,1.5T磁共振成像组104人,未接触磁共振成像组208人。用于配对的胎儿超声检查时的平均孕周:3-T 组为 27 周 2 天,1.5-T 组为 25 周 2 天,MRI 未暴露组为 26 周 0 天(P=.07)。3-T组和1.5-T组的胎儿核磁共振成像适应症分布无明显差异(p=.62)。3-T组的平均胎龄为37周5天,1.5-T组为38周0天,未暴露组为38周2天(p=.51)。在新生儿平均体重(3-T:3120±753 克;1.5-T:3104±704 克;未暴露:2967±614 克)、新生儿体重百分位数(3-T:45±27;1.5-T:42±26;MRI:41±24);新生儿头围(3-T:34±3 cm;1.5-T:34±3 cm;未暴露:34±2 cm)或新生儿头围百分位数(3-T:48±29;1.5-T:42±23;未暴露:43±30)。结论接受过胎内 3-T 磁共振成像的新生儿、接受过胎内 1.5-T 磁共振成像的新生儿和未接受过胎内磁共振成像的新生儿在新生儿人体测量方面没有明显差异。临床影响:研究结果支持 3-T 磁共振成像对发育中胎儿生长的安全性。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 去求助
来源期刊
CiteScore
12.80
自引率
4.00%
发文量
920
审稿时长
3 months
期刊介绍: Founded in 1907, the monthly American Journal of Roentgenology (AJR) is the world’s longest continuously published general radiology journal. AJR is recognized as among the specialty’s leading peer-reviewed journals and has a worldwide circulation of close to 25,000. The journal publishes clinically-oriented articles across all radiology subspecialties, seeking relevance to radiologists’ daily practice. The journal publishes hundreds of articles annually with a diverse range of formats, including original research, reviews, clinical perspectives, editorials, and other short reports. The journal engages its audience through a spectrum of social media and digital communication activities.
期刊最新文献
Intussusception Reduction: Counterpoint-In the Age of Ultrasound Diagnosis, Reduction Is Urgent, Not Emergent. Intussusception Reduction: Point-Emergent Reduction Is Best for Patient Care. Reply to "Minimizing Medical Malpractice Risk for Radiologists Using Artificial Intelligence". Minimizing Medical Malpractice Risk for Radiologists Using Artificial Intelligence. Decoupling Visual Parsing and Diagnostic Reasoning for Vision-Language Models (GPT-4o and GPT-5): Analysis Using Thoracic Imaging Quiz Cases.
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
现在去查看 取消
×
提示
确定
0
微信
客服QQ
Book学术公众号 扫码关注我们
反馈
×
意见反馈
请填写您的意见或建议
请填写您的手机或邮箱
已复制链接
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
×
扫码分享
扫码分享
Book学术官方微信
Book学术官方微信
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:604180095
Book学术
文献互助 智能选刊 最新文献 互助须知 联系我们:info@booksci.cn
Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。
Copyright © 2023 Book学术 All rights reserved.
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号 京ICP备2023020795号-1