Evidence map›Paper›PMID 39774200›Full record

ArticlePLOS digital health2024

Automated craniofacial biometry with 3D T2w fetal MRI.

Jacqueline Matthew, Alena Uus, Alexia Egloff Collado, Aysha Luis, Sophie Arulkumaran, Abi Fukami-Gartner, Vanessa Kyriakopoulou, Daniel Cromb, Robert Wright, Kathleen Colford and 8 more

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in PLOS digital health, 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 3 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
3citing papers in PubMed
–field-weighted citation impact
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

3 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Article
  2. Article
  3. Article
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

18 authors.

Jacqueline MatthewDepartment of Early Life Imaging, School of Biomedical Engineering and Imaging Sciences, King's College London, St Thomas' Hospital, London, United Kingdom.ORCID https://orcid.org/0000-0003-4754-0322
Alena UusDepartment of Early Life Imaging, School of Biomedical Engineering and Imaging Sciences, King's College London, St Thomas' Hospital, London, United Kingdom.
Alexia Egloff ColladoDepartment of Early Life Imaging, School of Biomedical Engineering and Imaging Sciences, King's College London, St Thomas' Hospital, London, United Kingdom.
Aysha LuisDepartment of Early Life Imaging, School of Biomedical Engineering and Imaging Sciences, King's College London, St Thomas' Hospital, London, United Kingdom.
Sophie ArulkumaranDepartment of Early Life Imaging, School of Biomedical Engineering and Imaging Sciences, King's College London, St Thomas' Hospital, London, United Kingdom.
Abi Fukami-GartnerDepartment of Early Life Imaging, School of Biomedical Engineering and Imaging Sciences, King's College London, St Thomas' Hospital, London, United Kingdom.ORCID https://orcid.org/0000-0001-6825-9025
Vanessa KyriakopoulouDepartment of Early Life Imaging, School of Biomedical Engineering and Imaging Sciences, King's College London, St Thomas' Hospital, London, United Kingdom.
Daniel CrombDepartment of Early Life Imaging, School of Biomedical Engineering and Imaging Sciences, King's College London, St Thomas' Hospital, London, United Kingdom.
Robert WrightDepartment of Early Life Imaging, School of Biomedical Engineering and Imaging Sciences, King's College London, St Thomas' Hospital, London, United Kingdom.
Kathleen ColfordDepartment of Early Life Imaging, School of Biomedical Engineering and Imaging Sciences, King's College London, St Thomas' Hospital, London, United Kingdom.ORCID https://orcid.org/0000-0001-6501-8867
Maria DeprezDepartment of Early Life Imaging, School of Biomedical Engineering and Imaging Sciences, King's College London, St Thomas' Hospital, London, United Kingdom.
Jana HutterDepartment of Early Life Imaging, School of Biomedical Engineering and Imaging Sciences, King's College London, St Thomas' Hospital, London, United Kingdom.
Jonathan O'MuircheartaighDepartment of Early Life Imaging, School of Biomedical Engineering and Imaging Sciences, King's College London, St Thomas' Hospital, London, United Kingdom.
Christina MalamateniouDivision of Midwifery and Radiography, City University of London, London, United Kingdom.
Reza RazaviDepartment of Early Life Imaging, School of Biomedical Engineering and Imaging Sciences, King's College London, St Thomas' Hospital, London, United Kingdom.
Lisa StoryDepartment of Early Life Imaging, School of Biomedical Engineering and Imaging Sciences, King's College London, St Thomas' Hospital, London, United Kingdom.
Joseph V HajnalDepartment of Early Life Imaging, School of Biomedical Engineering and Imaging Sciences, King's College London, St Thomas' Hospital, London, United Kingdom.
Mary A RutherfordDepartment of Early Life Imaging, School of Biomedical Engineering and Imaging Sciences, King's College London, St Thomas' Hospital, London, United Kingdom.

Funding

Structure and function of the placenta from implantation to delivery: a next generation MRI approachU01HD087202 · NICHD · KING'S COLLEGE LONDON · PI ALEXANDER, DANIEL, ALJABAR, PAUL · 2015 to 2015
$3.2M
NICHD NIH HHS U01 HD087202Wellcome Trust
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

objectivesEvaluating craniofacial phenotype-genotype correlations prenatally is increasingly important; however, it is subjective and challenging with 3D ultrasound. We developed an automated label propagation pipeline using 3D motion- corrected, slice-to-volume reconstructed (SVR) fetal MRI for craniofacial measurements.

methodsA literature review and expert consensus identified 31 craniofacial biometrics for fetal MRI. An MRI atlas with defined anatomical landmarks served as a template for subject registration, auto-labelling, and biometric calculation. We assessed 108 healthy controls and 24 fetuses with Down syndrome (T21) in the third trimester (29-36 weeks gestational age, GA) to identify meaningful biometrics in T21. Reliability and reproducibility were evaluated in 10 random datasets by four observers.

resultsAutomated labels were produced for all 132 subjects with a 0.3% placement error rate. Seven measurements, including anterior base of skull length and maxillary length, showed significant differences with large effect sizes between T21 and control groups (ANOVA, p<0.001). Manual measurements took 25-35 minutes per case, while automated extraction took approximately 5 minutes. Bland-Altman plots showed agreement within manual observer ranges except for mandibular width, which had higher variability. Extended GA growth charts (19-39 weeks), based on 280 control fetuses, were produced for future research.

conclusionThis is the first automated atlas-based protocol using 3D SVR MRI for fetal craniofacial biometrics, accurately revealing morphological craniofacial differences in a T21 cohort. Future work should focus on improving measurement reliability, larger clinical cohorts, and technical advancements, to enhance prenatal care and phenotypic characterisation.

Identifiers

PMID39774200
PMCPMC11684610

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY
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.