Magdalena Sanz-Cortes1, Gabriela Egaña-Ugrinovic1, Rudolf Zupan1, Francesc Figueras1, Eduard Gratacos1. 1. Department of Maternal-Fetal Medicine, ICGON, Hospital Clinic, University of Barcelona; Fetal and Perinatal Medicine Research Group, Institut d'Investigacions Biomediques August Pi i Sunyer (IDIBAPS); and Centro de Investigación Biomédica en Red de Enfermedades Raras (CIBERER), Barcelona, Spain.
Abstract
OBJECTIVE: We tested the hypothesis whether small-for-gestational-age (SGA) fetuses have different brain stem and cerebellar morphometry when compared with appropriate-for-gestational-age (AGA) fetuses and whether the differences in these structures were associated with their neonatal neurobehavior. STUDY DESIGN: Magnetic resonance imaging was performed on 51 SGA fetuses and 47 AGA fetuses at 37 weeks' gestation. Pontine width, medullar width, vermian width and height, cerebellar primary fissure's depth, and cerebellar volume were measured and corrected by biparietal diameter and cerebellar volume by total intracranial volume. Ratios were compared between cases and control subjects. The association between morphometric differences and neurobehavioral outcome in SGAs was tested. RESULTS: Brainstem and cerebellar ratios were significantly larger in SGA fetuses: pontine width, SGA 0.143 ± 0.01 vs AGA 0.135 ± 0.01 (P < .01); medullar width, SGA 0.088 ± 0.01 vs AGA 0.083 ± 0.01 (P = .03); vermian width, SGA 0.181 ± 0.03 vs AGA 0.162 ± 0.02 (P < .01); vermian height, SGA 0.235 ± 0.03 vs AGA 0.222 ± 0.01 (P < .01); cerebellar volume, SGA 0.042 ± 0.01 vs AGA 0.038 ± 0.00 (P = .04); with deeper cerebellar primary fissure in SGAs, SGA 0.041 ± 0.01 vs AGA 0.035 ± 0.01 (P = .01). Medullar, cerebellar biometries, and volumetry were significantly associated with different Neonatal Behavioral Assessment Scale cluster scores in SGA infants. CONCLUSION: Brain stem and cerebellar morphometric measurements are significantly different in term SGA fetuses, which are associated significantly with their neurobehavioral outcome. This finding supports the existence of brain microstructural changes in SGA fetuses and lays the basis for potential image biomarkers to detect fetuses who are at risk.
OBJECTIVE: We tested the hypothesis whether small-for-gestational-age (SGA) fetuses have different brain stem and cerebellar morphometry when compared with appropriate-for-gestational-age (AGA) fetuses and whether the differences in these structures were associated with their neonatal neurobehavior. STUDY DESIGN: Magnetic resonance imaging was performed on 51 SGA fetuses and 47 AGA fetuses at 37 weeks' gestation. Pontine width, medullar width, vermian width and height, cerebellar primary fissure's depth, and cerebellar volume were measured and corrected by biparietal diameter and cerebellar volume by total intracranial volume. Ratios were compared between cases and control subjects. The association between morphometric differences and neurobehavioral outcome in SGAs was tested. RESULTS: Brainstem and cerebellar ratios were significantly larger in SGA fetuses: pontine width, SGA 0.143 ± 0.01 vs AGA 0.135 ± 0.01 (P < .01); medullar width, SGA 0.088 ± 0.01 vs AGA 0.083 ± 0.01 (P = .03); vermian width, SGA 0.181 ± 0.03 vs AGA 0.162 ± 0.02 (P < .01); vermian height, SGA 0.235 ± 0.03 vs AGA 0.222 ± 0.01 (P < .01); cerebellar volume, SGA 0.042 ± 0.01 vs AGA 0.038 ± 0.00 (P = .04); with deeper cerebellar primary fissure in SGAs, SGA 0.041 ± 0.01 vs AGA 0.035 ± 0.01 (P = .01). Medullar, cerebellar biometries, and volumetry were significantly associated with different Neonatal Behavioral Assessment Scale cluster scores in SGA infants. CONCLUSION: Brain stem and cerebellar morphometric measurements are significantly different in term SGA fetuses, which are associated significantly with their neurobehavioral outcome. This finding supports the existence of brain microstructural changes in SGA fetuses and lays the basis for potential image biomarkers to detect fetuses who are at risk.
Authors: Emily Cohen; Flora Y Wong; Euan M Wallace; Joanne C Mockler; Alexsandria Odoi; Samantha Hollis; Rosemary S C Horne; Stephanie R Yiallourou Journal: Pediatr Res Date: 2017-04-07 Impact factor: 3.756
Authors: Katja Franke; Bea R H Van den Bergh; Susanne R de Rooij; Nasim Kroegel; Peter W Nathanielsz; Florian Rakers; Tessa J Roseboom; Otto W Witte; Matthias Schwab Journal: Neurosci Biobehav Rev Date: 2020-01-28 Impact factor: 8.989
Authors: Danielle B Pier; Ali Gholipour; Onur Afacan; Clemente Velasco-Annis; Sean Clancy; Kush Kapur; Judy A Estroff; Simon K Warfield Journal: J Neuroimaging Date: 2016-03-18 Impact factor: 2.486
Authors: Christopher McPherson; Jeffrey J Neil; Tiong Han Tjoeng; Roberta Pineda; Terrie E Inder Journal: Pediatr Res Date: 2015-04-09 Impact factor: 3.756
Authors: Marcus Lo; Leire Zubiaurre-Elorza; Conor Wild; Annika C Linke; David S C Lee; Victor K Han; Rhodri Cusack Journal: Neuroimage Clin Date: 2017-04-12 Impact factor: 4.881