Literature DB >> 24307080

Comparison of ultrasound and magnetic resonance imaging parameters in predicting survival in isolated left-sided congenital diaphragmatic hernia.

M Bebbington1, T Victoria, E Danzer, J Moldenhauer, N Khalek, M Johnson, H Hedrick, N S Adzick.   

Abstract

OBJECTIVE: To compare test characteristics of ultrasound- and magnetic resonance imaging (MRI)-derived parameters in predicting newborn survival in cases of isolated left-sided congenital diaphragmatic hernia (CDH).
METHODS: This was a retrospective study involving 85 fetuses with an isolated left CDH. All had detailed prenatal evaluation, prenatal care, delivery and postnatal care at a single institution. Ultrasound images were reviewed to allow calculation of the lung-to-head ratio (LHR) and the observed/expected LHR (O/E-LHR), and MRI images were reviewed to determine the observed/expected total lung volume (O/E-TLV) and the percent herniated liver (%HL). Univariable logistic regression was used to evaluate each parameter for its ability to predict survival. Receiver-operating characteristics (ROC) curves were constructed and test characteristics were determined for each parameter as a predictor of survival.
RESULTS: The overall survival for all fetuses included was 65%. Pseudo-R(2) values for all parameters were similar and were statistically significant as predictors of survival, with %HL having the highest pseudo-R(2) , of 0.28. ROC curve analysis showed ultrasound-determined parameters (LHR and O/E-LHR) to have a similar area under the curve (AUC), of 0.70, whilst MRI parameters (O/E-TLV and %HL) had AUC values of 0.82 and 0.84, respectively. At ROC-curve-determined cut-off values, MRI parameters had better test characteristics than did ultrasound parameters. At a standardized 5% false-positive rate, %HL performed best, with a sensitivity of 0.54 and a specificity of 0.95. At clinically employed cut-off values, sensitivity was similar for all parameters but MRI parameters provided the best combination of sensitivity and specificity, as evidenced by better likelihood ratios.
CONCLUSIONS: A variety of measures have been proposed as antenatal predictors of survival in CDH. Ultrasound parameters function at a similar level, whereas MRI-determined parameters appear to offer better predictive value.
Copyright © 2013 ISUOG. Published by John Wiley & Sons Ltd.

Entities:  

Keywords:  antenatal predictors of survival; congenital diaphragmatic hernia; fetal MRI

Mesh:

Year:  2014        PMID: 24307080     DOI: 10.1002/uog.13271

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Ultrasound Obstet Gynecol        ISSN: 0960-7692            Impact factor:   7.299


  9 in total

1.  Advances in ultrasound imaging for congenital malformations during early gestation.

Authors:  William F Rayburn; Jennifer A Jolley; Lynn L Simpson
Journal:  Birth Defects Res A Clin Mol Teratol       Date:  2015-03-28

2.  Diagnosis and management of congenital diaphragmatic hernia: a clinical practice guideline.

Authors:  Pramod Puligandla; Erik Skarsgard; Martin Offringa; Ian Adatia; Robert Baird; Michelle Bailey; Mary Brindle; Priscilla Chiu; Arthur Cogswell; Shyamala Dakshinamurti; Hélène Flageole; Richard Keijzer; Douglas McMillan; Titilayo Oluyomi-Obi; Thomas Pennaforte; Thérèse Perreault; Bruno Piedboeuf; S. Patricia Riley; Greg Ryan; Anne Synnes; Michael Traynor
Journal:  CMAJ       Date:  2018-01-29       Impact factor: 8.262

3.  Improved pulmonary function in the nitrofen model of congenital diaphragmatic hernia following prenatal maternal dexamethasone and/or sildenafil.

Authors:  Carmen Mesas Burgos; Erik G Pearson; Marcus Davey; John Riley; Huimin Jia; Pablo Laje; Alan W Flake; William H Peranteau
Journal:  Pediatr Res       Date:  2016-07-04       Impact factor: 3.756

4.  Ventricular function in congenital diaphragmatic hernia: a systematic review and meta-analysis.

Authors:  Rameshwar Prasad; Bijan Saha; Amit Kumar
Journal:  Eur J Pediatr       Date:  2021-11-01       Impact factor: 3.183

5.  The validity of the observed-to-expected lung-to-head ratio in congenital diaphragmatic hernia in an era of standardized neonatal treatment; a multicenter study.

Authors:  Kitty G Snoek; Nina C J Peters; Joost van Rosmalen; Arno F J van Heijst; Alex J Eggink; Esther Sikkel; René M Wijnen; Hanneke IJsselstijn; Titia E Cohen-Overbeek; Dick Tibboel
Journal:  Prenat Diagn       Date:  2017-06-01       Impact factor: 3.050

Review 6.  The role of magnetic resonance imaging in the diagnosis and prognostic evaluation of fetuses with congenital diaphragmatic hernia.

Authors:  Ilaria Amodeo; Irene Borzani; Genny Raffaeli; Nicola Persico; Giacomo Simeone Amelio; Silvia Gulden; Mariarosa Colnaghi; Eduardo Villamor; Fabio Mosca; Giacomo Cavallaro
Journal:  Eur J Pediatr       Date:  2022-07-07       Impact factor: 3.860

7.  Antenatal Assessment of the Prognosis of Congenital Diaphragmatic Hernia: Ethical Considerations and Impact for the Management.

Authors:  Kévin Le Duc; Sébastien Mur; Dyuti Sharma; Rony Sfeir; Pascal Vaast; Mohamed Riadh Boukhris; Alexandra Benachi; Laurent Storme
Journal:  Healthcare (Basel)       Date:  2022-07-30

8.  Prenatal Diagnosis and Evaluation of Sonographic Predictors for Intervention and Adverse Outcome in Congenital Pulmonary Airway Malformation.

Authors:  Astrid Hellmund; Christoph Berg; Annegret Geipel; Meike Bludau; Andreas Heydweiller; Haitham Bachour; Andreas Müller; Annette Müller; Ulrich Gembruch
Journal:  PLoS One       Date:  2016-03-15       Impact factor: 3.240

9.  Congenital diaphragmatic hernia: 25 years of shared knowledge; what about survival?

Authors:  Satyan Lakshminrusimha; Payam Vali
Journal:  J Pediatr (Rio J)       Date:  2019-10-17       Impact factor: 2.990

  9 in total

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.