Introduction
Methods
Protocol
Eligibility criteria
Participants
Reference standard
Exclusions
Search methods
Data collection
Selection of studies
Assessment of methodological quality of included studies
Data items and analysis
Results
Study characteristics
Author, year | Title/objective | Country of study | Target population | Method of selection | Retrospective (R), prospective (P), not specified (NS) | Total number in study | Final number included in review |
---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
Amini et al. 2010 | The clinical impact of fetal magnetic resonance imaging on management of CNS anomalies in the second trimester of pregnancy | Sweden | Foetuses with suspected CNS abnormality on USS | Consecutive | P | 29 | 18 |
Benacerraf et al. 2007 | What does magnetic resonance imaging add to the prenatal sonographic diagnosis of ventriculomegaly? | USA | Foetuses with VM on USS | Consecutive | P | 26 | 13 |
Benoist et al. 2008 | Cytomegalovirus-related fetal brain lesions: comparison between targeted ultrasound examination and magnetic resonance imaging | France | Foetuses with CMV infection | Consecutive | R | 49 | 47 |
Blaicher et al. 2003 | Magnetic resonance imaging in foetuses with bilateral moderate ventriculomegaly and suspected anomaly the corpus callosum on ultrasound scan | Austria | Foetuses with suspected VM and ACC on USS | Consecutive cases with VM and ACC | P | 41 | 14 |
Colleoni et al. 2012 | Prenatal diagnosis and outcome of fetal posterior fossa fluid collections | Italy | Foetuses with posterior fossa abnormality on USS | Consecutive fetuses with posterior fossa abnormalities | R | 105 | 51 |
D'Ercole et al. 1998 | Prenatal diagnosis of fetal corpus callosum agenesis by ultrasonography and magnetic resonance imaging | France | Foetuses with suspected ACC on US | Consecutive | P | 14 | 8 |
Doneda et al. 2010 | Early cerebral lesions in cytomegalovirus infection: prenatal MR imaging | Italy | Foetuses with CMV infection | Consecutive | P | 38 | 13 |
Frates et al. 2004 | Fetal anomalies: comparison of MR imaging and US for diagnosis | USA | Foetuses with abnormalities detected at US | Consecutive | P | 27 | 16 |
Garcia-Flores et al. 2013 | Fetal magnetic resonance imaging and neurosonography in congenital neurological anomalies: supplementary diagnostic and postnatal prognostic value | Spain | Foetuses with CNS abnormalities | Consecutive | R | 28 | 24 |
Glenn et al. 2005 | Fetal magnetic resonance imaging in the evaluation of fetuses referred for sonographically suspected abnormalities of the corpus callosum | USA | Foetuses with suspected CC abnormalities | Consecutive cases selected of foetuses with suspected CC abnormalities | R | 10 | r6 |
Hagmann et al. 2008 | Foetal brain imaging: ultrasound or MRI. A comparison between magnetic resonance imaging and a dedicated multidisciplinary neurosonographic opinion | UK | Comparison of standard US, specialist US and MRI accuracy + change in management | Consecutive | R | 51 | 12 (comparison of specialist US and MRI only) |
Hamisa et al. 2013 | Magnetic resonance imaging versus Ultrasound examination in detection of prenatal fetal brain anomalies | Egypt | Foetuses with suspected brain abnormality on USS | Consecutive | P | 23 | 23 |
Hosny & Elghawabi 2010 | Ultrafast MRI of the fetus: an increasingly important tool in prenatal diagnosis of congenital anomalies | Egypt | Foetuses with suspected brain abnormality on USS | Consecutive | NS | 25 | 16 |
Ismail et al. 2002 | Fetal magnetic resonance imaging in prenatal diagnosis of central nervous system abnormalities: 3-year experience | UK | Foetuses with suspected brain abnormality on USS | Consecutive | R | 27 | 20 |
Kul et al. 2012 | Contribution of MRI to ultrasound in the diagnosis of fetal anomalies | Turkey | Foetuses with suspected brain abnormality on USS | Consecutive | P | 184 | 76 |
Malinger et al. 2004 | Fetal brain imaging: a comparison between magnetic resonance imaging and dedicated neurosonography | Israel | Foetuses with suspected brain abnormality on USS | Consecutive | P | 42 | 30 |
Malinger et al. 2011 | Can syndromic macrocephaly be diagnosed in utero? | Israel | Foetuses with suspected macrocephaly on US | Consecutive | R | 98 | 8 |
Manganaro et al. 2012 | Role of foetal MRI in the evaluation of ischaemic-haemorrhagic lesions of the foetal brain | Italy | Foetuses with ischaemic-haemorrhagic lesions | Consecutive with inclusion criteria | P | 271 | 13 |
Peruzzi et al. 2010 | Magnetic resonance imaging versus ultrasonography for the in utero evaluation of central nervous system anomalies | USA | Foetuses with suspected CNS abnormality on USS | Consecutive | R | 26 | 26 |
Phua et al. 2009 | Magnetic resonance imaging of the fetal central nervous system in Singapore | Singapore | Foetuses with suspected CNS abnormality on USS | Foetuses who had an MRI | R | 31 | 13 |
Resta et al. 1994 | Magnetic resonance imaging in pregnancy: study of fetal cerebral malformations | Italy | Foetuses with suspected CNS abnormality on USS | Consecutive | P | 15 | 11 |
Rubod et al. 2005 | Role of fetal ultrasound and magnetic resonance imaging in the prenatal diagnosis of migration disorders | France | Foetuses with suspected migration abnormalities on US | Consecutive | NS | 14 | 9 |
Saleem et al. 2009 | Fetal MRI in the evaluation of fetuses referred for sonographically suspected neural tube defects (NTDs): Impact on diagnosis and management decision | Egypt | Foetuses with suspected NTD on US | Consecutive | P | 19 | 19 |
Simon et al. 2000 | Fast MR imaging of fetal CNS anomalies in utero | USA | Foetuses with suspected CNS abnormality on USS | Consecutive | P | 73 | 23 |
Sohn et al. 2007 | The usefulness of fetal MRI for prenatal diagnosis | Korea | Foetuses with suspected CNS abnormality on USS | Consecutive | R | 30 | 6 |
Twickler et al. 2003 | Second-opinion magnetic resonance imaging for suspected fetal central nervous system abnormalities | USA | Foetuses with suspected CNS abnormality on USS | Consecutive | P | 72 | 72 |
Wang 2006 | Fetal central nervous system anomalies: Comparison of magnetic resonance imaging and ultrasonography for diagnosis | China | Foetuses with suspected CNS abnormality on USS | Consecutive | NS | 34 | 34 |
We et al. 2012 | Usefulness of additional fetal magnetic resonance imaging in the prenatal diagnosis of congenital abnormalities | Korea | Foetuses with suspected brain abnormality on USS | Consecutive (8 years) | R | 81 | 23 |
Whitby et al. 2004 | Comparison of ultrasound and magnetic resonance imaging in 100 singleton pregnancies with suspected brain abnormalities | UK | Foetuses with suspected CNS abnormality on USS | Consecutive | P | 101 | 100 |
Whitby et al. 2004 | Corroboration of in utero MRI using post-mortem MRI and autopsy in foetuses with CNS abnormalities | UK | Foetuses with prenatal US and iuMRI and who underwent PM MRI | Consecutive | P | 12 | 12 |
Yuh et al. 1994 | MR of fetal central nervous system abnormalities | USA | Foetuses with suspected CNS abnormality on USS | Consecutive | P | 22 | 19 |
Rajaswaran et al. 2009 | Ultrasound versus MRI in the diagnosis of fetal head and trunk abnormalities | India | Foetuses with suspected head or trunk abnormality on USS | Consecutive fetuses with head or trunk abnormalities | P | 40 | 30 |
Lipitz et al. 2010 | Value of prenatal ultrasound and magnetic resonance imaging in assessment of congenital primary cytomegalovirus infection | Israel | Foetuses with CMV infection | Consecutive | P | 38 | 35 |
Paladini et al. 2014 | Accuracy of neurosonography and MRI in clinical management of fetuses referred with central nervous system abnormalities | Italy | Accuracy of US and MRI | Consecutive | R | 834 | 126 |
Methodological quality
Diagnostic accuracy of US and MRI
Agreement between USS and iuMR
Number | Percentage | ||
---|---|---|---|
1a | iuMR and USS agreed and correct | 527 | 55 |
1b | iuMR and USS agreed but incorrect | 52 | 5.5 |
2a | iuMR more exact/additional info to USS | 146 | 15 |
2b | iuMR changed incorrect USS diagnosis | 186 | 19 |
Abnormalities identified correctly by iuMR but missed by USS | 139 | ||
Abnormalities diagnosed by USS but correctly excluded by iuMR | 47 | ||
3a | USS more exact/additional info to iuMR | 14 | 1.5 |
3b | iuMR incorrectly changed correct USS diagnosis | 34 | 4 |
Abnormalities diagnosed by USS but wrongly excluded by iuMR | 10 | ||
Abnormalities overdiagnosed by iuMR that were absent on USS and ORD | 24 | ||
Total | 959 |
Disagreement between USS and iuMR
Anomalies identified | Abnormalities identified correctly by MRI but missed by US | Abnormalities diagnosed by US but correctly excluded by MRI | Abnormalities diagnosed by US but wrongly excluded by MRI | Abnormalities overdiagnosed by MRI that were absent on US and ORD | US and MRI diagnoses both wrong (either missed or overdiagnosed) | All groups |
---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
Ventricular system (Ventriculomegaly, aqueduct stenosis) | 5 | 10 | 1 | 1 | 6 | 23 |
Neural tube defects (Anencephaly, encephalocoele, myelomeningocele) | 5 | 5 | 0 | 1 | 1 | 12 |
Cortical formation abnormalities (Hemi/megalencephaly, schizencephaly, lissencephaly, heterotopia, microcephaly) | 21 | 3 | 3 | 5 | 14 | 46 |
Midline abnormalities (Holoprosencephaly, agenesis/hypogenesis of corpus callosum, absent cavum septum) | 39 | 15 | 2 | 1 | 7 | 64 |
Posterior fossa (Abnormalities: mega cisterna magna, Blake’s pouch cyst, Dandy-Walker or variant cerebellar or vermian hypoplasia) | 28 | 13 | 2 | 2 | 12 | 57 |
Vascular abnormalities (Haemorrhage, haematoma dural fistula aneurysm) | 17 | 0 | 1 | 1 | 20 | |
Destructive or mass cerebral lesions (Tumours, Cysts, PVL, other lesions, dysplasias) | 24 | 1 | 1 | 13 | 11 | 50 |
Totals | 139 | 47 | 10 | 24 | 52 |