ArticlePediatric radiology2022
Contribution of fetal magnetic resonance imaging in fetuses with congenital heart disease.
Article in Pediatric radiology, 2022. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 13 papers.
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.
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.
Who cites it
13 citing papers in PubMed, 19 citations in OpenAlex.
- The role of magnetic resonance imaging in fetal congenital heart disease.Pediatric radiology · 2025Review
- Fetal Cardiovascular Magnetic Resonance: History, Current Status, and Future Directions.Journal of magnetic resonance imaging : JMRI · 2025Review
- Fetal magnetic resonance imaging diagnosis of pulmonary lymphangiectasia in hypoplastic left heart syndrome: Association with fetal echocardiography and postnatal outcome.Journal of cardiovascular magnetic resonance : official journal of the Society for Cardiovascular Magnetic Resonance · 2025Article
- Three-Dimensional Ultrasound for Physical and Virtual Fetal Heart Models: Current Status and Future Perspectives.Journal of clinical medicine · 2024Review
- Prenatal cardiac findings and 22q11.2 deletion syndrome: Fetal detection and evaluation.Prenatal diagnosis · 2024Review
- Perinatal clinical course of Vici syndrome associated with novelBMJ case reports · 2024Article
- Utility of Fetal Cardiac Resonance Imaging in Prenatal Clinical Practice: Current State of the Art.Diagnostics (Basel, Switzerland) · 2023Review
- Altered In Utero Metabolic Brain Trajectories in CHD: Going Beyond Fetal Brain Structure and Physiology.Journal of the American College of Cardiology · 2023Article
- Clinical Course and Outcome of Prenatally Detected 22q11.2 Deletion Syndrome-A Retrospective Analysis.Diagnostics (Basel, Switzerland) · 2023Article
- Fetal Cardiac Cine MRI with Doppler US Gating in Complex Congenital Heart Disease.Radiology. Cardiothoracic imaging · 2023Article
- Advanced imaging of fetal cardiac function.Frontiers in cardiovascular medicine · 2023Review
- Feasibility of Non-Gated Dynamic Fetal Cardiac MRI for Identification of Fetal Cardiovascular Anatomy.Fetal diagnosis and therapy · 2023Article
- Magnetic resonance imaging of the monkey fetal brain in utero.Investigative magnetic resonance imaging · 2022Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
6 authors at 1 institution in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundIncreasing evidence supports an association among congenital heart disease (CHD), structural brain lesions on neuroimaging, and increased risk of neurodevelopmental delay and other structural anomalies. Fetal MRI has been found to be effective in demonstrating fetal structural and developmental abnormalities.
objectiveTo determine the contribution of fetal MRI to identifying cardiovascular and non-cardiovascular anomalies in fetuses with CHD compared to prenatal US and fetal echocardiography. MATERIALS AND
methodsWe performed a retrospective study of fetuses with CHD identified by fetal echocardiography. Exams were performed on 1.5-tesla (T) or 3-T magnets using a balanced turbo field echo sequence triggered by an external electrocardiogram simulator with a fixed heart rate of 140 beats per minute (bpm). Fetal echocardiography was performed by pediatric cardiologists and detailed obstetrical US by maternal-fetal medicine specialists prior to referral to MRI. We compared the sensitivity of fetal MRI and fetal echocardiography for the diagnosis of cardiovascular anomalies, as well as the sensitivity of fetal MRI and referral US for the diagnosis of non-cardiac anomalies. We performed statistical analysis using the McNemar test.
resultsWe identified 121 anomalies in 31 fetuses. Of these, 73 (60.3%) were cardiovascular and 48 (39.7%) involved other organ systems. Fetal echocardiography was more sensitive for diagnosing cardiovascular anomalies compared to fetal MRI, but the difference was not statistically significant (85.9%, 95% confidence interval [CI] 77.8-94.0% vs. 77.5%, 95% CI 67.7-87.2%, respectively; McNemar test 2.29; P=0.13). The sensitivity of fetal MRI was higher for diagnosing extracardiac anomalies when compared to referral US (84.1%, 95% CI 73.3-94.9% vs. 31.8%, 95% CI 18.1-45.6%, respectively; McNemar test 12.9; P<0.001). The additional information provided by fetal MRI changed prognosis, counseling or management for 10/31 fetuses (32.2%), all in the group of 19 fetuses with anomalies in other organs and systems besides CHD.
conclusionFetal MRI performed in a population of fetuses with CHD provided additional information that altered prognosis, counseling or management in approximately one-third of the fetuses, mainly by identifying previously unknown anomalies in other organs and systems.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
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.