ArticleFrontiers in cardiovascular medicine2024
A comparative study of fetal cardiovascular assessment: utilizing Doppler ultrasound gated MRI and echocardiography with detailed analysis using five axial views.
Article in Frontiers in cardiovascular medicine, 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.
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
0 citing papers in PubMed.
No citing paper in PubMed yet.
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
10 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Objectives: To investigate the diagnostic performance of fetal cardiovascular magnetic resonance imaging (MRI) using Doppler ultrasound (DUS) gating for the evaluation of the standardized five axial views in comparison with fetal echocardiography. Methods: In this prospective study 29 pregnant women (median: 34.4 weeks of gestation) underwent fetal cardiovascular MRI using DUS gating at 3 Tesla. The standardized five axial views in prenatal screening (fetal abdomen, four-chamber view, left ventricular outflow tract, right ventricular outflow tract, and three-vessel view) were independently assessed and analysed by both fetal MRI and fetal echocardiography on the same day. Image analysis included qualitative assessment and quantitative measurements of cardiovascular structures. MR image quality was assessed using a 4-point scale (from 1 = low to 4 = excellent). Postnatal echocardiography was performed for validation. Results: 17/28 fetuses (60.7%) had pathological findings [16 congenital heart defect (CHD), one diaphragmatic hernia] in prenatal echocardiography. One fetus was excluded due to severe motion. Overall sensitivity and specificity in detecting fetal cardiac abnormalities was 88% and 100%, respectively, for fetal MRI and 100% and 100% for fetal echocardiography. MR image quality for evaluation of cardiac structures was high with a mean score of 2.8 (±0.8) (score 4: 15.9%, score 3: 53.8%, score 2: 19.3%, score 1: 11%). Quantitative measurements did not differ between fetal cardiovascular MRI and fetal echocardiography (all Conclusion: Diagnostic performance of fetal cardiovascular MRI using DUS gating was comparable to fetal echocardiography. Fetal cardiovascular MRI using DUS gating might be a valuable diagnostic adjunct for the prenatal evaluation of CHD.
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.