Evidence map›Paper›PMID 30298210›Full record

ArticlePediatric radiology2019

Does 3-T fetal MRI induce adverse acoustic effects in the neonate? A preliminary study comparing postnatal auditory test performance of fetuses scanned at 1.5 and 3 T.

Camilo Jaimes, Jorge Delgado, Mary Beth Cunnane, Holly L Hedrick, N Scott Adzick, Michael S Gee, Teresa Victoria

Abstract read
PubMed Publisher
In one paragraph

Article in Pediatric radiology, 2019. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 22 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
22citing papers in PubMed, 1 pooled it
1.4field-weighted citation impact, top 20% of its field
1 · What the graph read from it

What it found

Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.

The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.

2 · The registry

The trial behind it

Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.

Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

22 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it, 42 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. No Meta-analytic Evidence for Risks due to Prenatal Magnetic Resonance Imaging in Animal Models.Biological psychiatry. Cognitive neuroscience and neuroimaging · 2023
    Pooled it
  2. Article
  3. Advancements in MRI application in the morphological development of fetal cerebral venous system: a review.Child's nervous system : ChNS : official journal of the International Society for Pediatric Neurosurgery · 2025
    Review
  4. Article
  5. Article
  6. Review
  7. Review
  8. Review
  9. Safety of Magnetic Resonance Imaging in Pregnancy.Radiologie (Heidelberg, Germany) · 2023
    Review
  10. Article
  11. Fetal MRI: what's new? A short review.European radiology experimental · 2023
    Review
  12. Review
  13. Article
  14. Fetal MRI at 3 T: Principles to Optimize Success.Radiographics : a review publication of the Radiological Society of North America, Inc · 2023
    Article
  15. Article
  16. Article
  17. Article
  18. Article
  19. Article
  20. Review
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

7 authors at 3 institutions in 1 country.

Camilo JaimesDepartment of Radiology, Massachusetts General Hospital, Harvard Medical School, Boston, MA, USA.
Jorge DelgadoDepartment of Radiology, The Children's Hospital of Philadelphia, Perelman School of Medicine at the University of Pennsylvania, 3401 Civic Center Blvd., Philadelphia, PA, 19104, USA.
Mary Beth CunnaneDepartment of Radiology, Massachusetts General Hospital, Harvard Medical School, Boston, MA, USA.
Holly L HedrickDepartment of Surgery, The Children's Hospital of Philadelphia, Perelman School of Medicine at the University of Pennsylvania, Philadelphia, PA, USA.
N Scott AdzickDepartment of Surgery, The Children's Hospital of Philadelphia, Perelman School of Medicine at the University of Pennsylvania, Philadelphia, PA, USA.
Michael S GeeDepartment of Radiology, Massachusetts General Hospital, Harvard Medical School, Boston, MA, USA.
Teresa VictoriaDepartment of Radiology, The Children's Hospital of Philadelphia, Perelman School of Medicine at the University of Pennsylvania, 3401 Civic Center Blvd., Philadelphia, PA, 19104, USA. Victoria@email.chop.edu.ORCID http://orcid.org/0000-0002-5927-4220
Children's Hospital of Philadelphia · USHarvard University · USMassachusetts Eye and Ear Infirmary · US

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundFetal MRI at 3 T is associated with increased acoustic noise relative to 1.5 T.

objectiveThe goal of this study is to determine if there is an increased prevalence of congenital hearing loss in neonates who had a 3-T prenatal MR vs. those who had it at 1.5 T. MATERIALS AND

methodsWe retrospectively identified all subjects who had 3-T fetal MRI between 2012 and 2016 and also underwent universal neonatal hearing screening within 60 days of birth. Fetuses with incomplete hearing screening, magnetic resonance imaging (MRI) studies at both field strengths or fetuses affected by conditions associated with hearing loss were excluded. A random group of controls scanned at 1.5 T was identified. Five subjects had repeat same-strength MRIs (one at 3 T and four at 1.5 T). The pass/fail rate of the transient otoacoustic emissions test and auditory brainstem response test were compared using the Fisher exact test. A logistic regression was performed to assess the effects of other known risk factors for congenital hearing loss.

resultsThree hundred forty fetal MRI examinations were performed at 3 T, of which 62 met inclusion criteria. A control population of 1.5-T fetal MRI patients was created using the same exclusion criteria, with 62 patients randomly selected from the eligible population. The fail rates of transient otoacoustic emissions test for the 1.5-T and 3-T groups were 9.7% and 6.5%, respectively, and for the auditory brainstem response test were 3.2% and 1.6%, respectively. There was no significant difference in the fail rate of either test between groups (P=0.74 for transient otoacoustic emissions test, and P=0.8 for auditory brainstem response test). The median gestational age of the 3-T group was 30 weeks, 1 day, significantly higher (P<0.001) than the 1.5-T group (median gestational age: 20 weeks, 2 days).

conclusionOur findings suggest that the increase in noise associated with 3 T does not increase the rate of clinically detectable hearing abnormalities.

Indexed as

FetusAcousticsFemaleHearing Loss, Noise-InducedHearing TestsHumansInfantInfant, NewbornMagnetic Resonance ImagingMaleNeonatal ScreeningPregnancy3-TeslaAcoustic effectsFetusHearing testMagnetic resonance imagingNewbornSafety

Identifiers

PMID30298210
OpenAlexW2896436065

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.