评估小颌畸形的产前诊断成像:系统综述与元分析》。

IF 1.2 4区 医学 Q3 DENTISTRY, ORAL SURGERY & MEDICINE Cleft Palate-Craniofacial Journal Pub Date : 2024-12-01 Epub Date: 2023-08-01 DOI:10.1177/10556656231190525
Caroline M Fields, Nicolas S Poupore, April N Taniguchi, Hussein Smaily, Shaun A Nguyen, Ryan D Cuff, Phayvanh P Pecha, William W Carroll
{"title":"评估小颌畸形的产前诊断成像:系统综述与元分析》。","authors":"Caroline M Fields, Nicolas S Poupore, April N Taniguchi, Hussein Smaily, Shaun A Nguyen, Ryan D Cuff, Phayvanh P Pecha, William W Carroll","doi":"10.1177/10556656231190525","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Objective: </strong>Studies evaluating the ability to diagnose and accurately predict the severity of micrognathia prenatally have yielded inconsistent results. This review aimed to evaluate reliability of prenatal diagnostic imaging in the diagnosis and characterization of micrognathia.</p><p><strong>Design: </strong>Systematic review and meta-analysis.</p><p><strong>Setting: </strong>Studies with a prenatal diagnosis of micrognathia via ultrasound with a confirmatory postnatal examination were included. Prenatal severity was defined with and without mandibular measurements. Extent of airway obstruction at birth was defined by level of intervention required. Meta-analyses of proportions and relative risk were performed.</p><p><strong>Patients: </strong>A total of 16 studies with 2753 neonates were included.</p><p><strong>Main outcome measures: </strong>Primary outcome was the efficacy of characterizing the degree of micrognathia on prenatal imaging as it relates to respiratory obstruction at birth. Secondary outcome was the accuracy of prenatal diagnosis with the utilization of mandibular measurements versus without.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>Performing meta-analysis of proportions, the proportion of missed prenatal diagnoses of micrognathia made without mandibular measurements was 11.62% (95%CI 2.58-25.94). Utilizing mandibular measurements, the proportion of cases missed were statistically lower (0.20% [95%CI 0.00-0.70]). Patients determined to have severe micrognathia by prenatal imaging did not have a statistically significant increase in risk for more severe respiratory obstruction at birth (RR 3.13 [95%CI 0.59-16.55], <i>P</i> = .180).</p><p><strong>Conclusion: </strong>The proportion micrognathia cases missed when prenatal diagnosis was made without mandibular measurements was over 1 in 10, with mandibular measures improving accuracy. This study highlights the need for a uniform objective criterion to improve prenatal diagnosis and planning for postnatal care.</p>","PeriodicalId":55255,"journal":{"name":"Cleft Palate-Craniofacial Journal","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":1.2000,"publicationDate":"2024-12-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Evaluating Prenatal Diagnostic Imaging for Micrognathia: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis.\",\"authors\":\"Caroline M Fields, Nicolas S Poupore, April N Taniguchi, Hussein Smaily, Shaun A Nguyen, Ryan D Cuff, Phayvanh P Pecha, William W Carroll\",\"doi\":\"10.1177/10556656231190525\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"<p><strong>Objective: </strong>Studies evaluating the ability to diagnose and accurately predict the severity of micrognathia prenatally have yielded inconsistent results. This review aimed to evaluate reliability of prenatal diagnostic imaging in the diagnosis and characterization of micrognathia.</p><p><strong>Design: </strong>Systematic review and meta-analysis.</p><p><strong>Setting: </strong>Studies with a prenatal diagnosis of micrognathia via ultrasound with a confirmatory postnatal examination were included. Prenatal severity was defined with and without mandibular measurements. Extent of airway obstruction at birth was defined by level of intervention required. Meta-analyses of proportions and relative risk were performed.</p><p><strong>Patients: </strong>A total of 16 studies with 2753 neonates were included.</p><p><strong>Main outcome measures: </strong>Primary outcome was the efficacy of characterizing the degree of micrognathia on prenatal imaging as it relates to respiratory obstruction at birth. Secondary outcome was the accuracy of prenatal diagnosis with the utilization of mandibular measurements versus without.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>Performing meta-analysis of proportions, the proportion of missed prenatal diagnoses of micrognathia made without mandibular measurements was 11.62% (95%CI 2.58-25.94). Utilizing mandibular measurements, the proportion of cases missed were statistically lower (0.20% [95%CI 0.00-0.70]). Patients determined to have severe micrognathia by prenatal imaging did not have a statistically significant increase in risk for more severe respiratory obstruction at birth (RR 3.13 [95%CI 0.59-16.55], <i>P</i> = .180).</p><p><strong>Conclusion: </strong>The proportion micrognathia cases missed when prenatal diagnosis was made without mandibular measurements was over 1 in 10, with mandibular measures improving accuracy. This study highlights the need for a uniform objective criterion to improve prenatal diagnosis and planning for postnatal care.</p>\",\"PeriodicalId\":55255,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Cleft Palate-Craniofacial Journal\",\"volume\":null,\"pages\":null},\"PeriodicalIF\":1.2000,\"publicationDate\":\"2024-12-01\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Cleft Palate-Craniofacial Journal\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"3\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.1177/10556656231190525\",\"RegionNum\":4,\"RegionCategory\":\"医学\",\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"2023/8/1 0:00:00\",\"PubModel\":\"Epub\",\"JCR\":\"Q3\",\"JCRName\":\"DENTISTRY, ORAL SURGERY & MEDICINE\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Cleft Palate-Craniofacial Journal","FirstCategoryId":"3","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1177/10556656231190525","RegionNum":4,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"2023/8/1 0:00:00","PubModel":"Epub","JCR":"Q3","JCRName":"DENTISTRY, ORAL SURGERY & MEDICINE","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

摘要

目的:对产前诊断和准确预测小颌畸形严重程度的能力进行评估的研究结果并不一致。本综述旨在评估产前诊断成像在诊断和描述小颌畸形方面的可靠性:设计:系统综述和荟萃分析:纳入通过超声波产前诊断小颌畸形并进行产后确诊检查的研究。有无下颌骨测量均可定义产前严重程度。出生时气道阻塞的程度根据所需的干预程度来定义。对比例和相对风险进行了 Meta 分析:共纳入 16 项研究,2753 名新生儿:主要结果:主要结果是产前成像显示小颌畸形程度与出生时呼吸道阻塞相关性的有效性。次要结果是利用下颌骨测量与不利用下颌骨测量进行产前诊断的准确性:进行比例荟萃分析后发现,未进行下颌骨测量的小颌畸形产前漏诊比例为 11.62%(95%CI 2.58-25.94)。利用下颌骨测量结果的漏诊比例在统计学上较低(0.20% [95%CI 0.00-0.70])。通过产前成像确定为重度小颌畸形的患者在出生时发生更严重呼吸道梗阻的风险没有统计学意义的增加(RR 3.13 [95%CI 0.59-16.55],P = .180):结论:在没有进行下颌骨测量的情况下进行产前诊断,漏诊的小颌畸形病例比例超过十分之一,而下颌骨测量可提高准确性。这项研究强调,需要一个统一的客观标准来改进产前诊断和产后护理计划。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
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
Evaluating Prenatal Diagnostic Imaging for Micrognathia: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis.

Objective: Studies evaluating the ability to diagnose and accurately predict the severity of micrognathia prenatally have yielded inconsistent results. This review aimed to evaluate reliability of prenatal diagnostic imaging in the diagnosis and characterization of micrognathia.

Design: Systematic review and meta-analysis.

Setting: Studies with a prenatal diagnosis of micrognathia via ultrasound with a confirmatory postnatal examination were included. Prenatal severity was defined with and without mandibular measurements. Extent of airway obstruction at birth was defined by level of intervention required. Meta-analyses of proportions and relative risk were performed.

Patients: A total of 16 studies with 2753 neonates were included.

Main outcome measures: Primary outcome was the efficacy of characterizing the degree of micrognathia on prenatal imaging as it relates to respiratory obstruction at birth. Secondary outcome was the accuracy of prenatal diagnosis with the utilization of mandibular measurements versus without.

Results: Performing meta-analysis of proportions, the proportion of missed prenatal diagnoses of micrognathia made without mandibular measurements was 11.62% (95%CI 2.58-25.94). Utilizing mandibular measurements, the proportion of cases missed were statistically lower (0.20% [95%CI 0.00-0.70]). Patients determined to have severe micrognathia by prenatal imaging did not have a statistically significant increase in risk for more severe respiratory obstruction at birth (RR 3.13 [95%CI 0.59-16.55], P = .180).

Conclusion: The proportion micrognathia cases missed when prenatal diagnosis was made without mandibular measurements was over 1 in 10, with mandibular measures improving accuracy. This study highlights the need for a uniform objective criterion to improve prenatal diagnosis and planning for postnatal care.

求助全文
通过发布文献求助,成功后即可免费获取论文全文。 去求助
来源期刊
CiteScore
2.70
自引率
36.40%
发文量
215
期刊介绍: The Cleft Palate-Craniofacial Journal (CPCJ) is the premiere peer-reviewed, interdisciplinary, international journal dedicated to current research on etiology, prevention, diagnosis, and treatment in all areas pertaining to craniofacial anomalies. CPCJ reports on basic science and clinical research aimed at better elucidating the pathogenesis, pathology, and optimal methods of treatment of cleft and craniofacial anomalies. The journal strives to foster communication and cooperation among professionals from all specialties.
期刊最新文献
Where is the Care? Identifying the Impact of Rurality on SLP Caseloads and Treatment Decisions for Children with Cleft Palate. The Role of Postoperative Nasal Stents in Cleft Rhinoplasty: A Systematic Review. Evaluating Prenatal Diagnostic Imaging for Micrognathia: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis. Family Experiences with Diagnosis of Craniosynostosis: Thematic Analysis of Online Discussion Boards. Protocol Registration.
×
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学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
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