Analysis of maturation features in fetal brain ultrasound via artificial intelligence for the estimation of gestational age
- PMID: 34403820
- DOI: 10.1016/j.ajogmf.2021.100462
Analysis of maturation features in fetal brain ultrasound via artificial intelligence for the estimation of gestational age
Abstract
Background: Optimal prenatal care relies on accurate gestational age dating. After the first trimester, the accuracy of current gestational age estimation methods diminishes with increasing gestational age. Considering that, in many countries, access to first trimester crown rump length is still difficult owing to late booking, infrequent access to prenatal care, and unavailability of early ultrasound examination, the development of accurate methods for gestational age estimation in the second and third trimester of pregnancy remains an unsolved challenge in fetal medicine.
Objective: This study aimed to evaluate the performance of an artificial intelligence method based on automated analysis of fetal brain morphology on standard cranial ultrasound sections to estimate the gestational age in second and third trimester fetuses compared with the current formulas using standard fetal biometry.
Study design: Standard transthalamic axial plane images from a total of 1394 patients undergoing routine fetal ultrasound were used to develop an artificial intelligence method to automatically estimate gestational age from the analysis of fetal brain information. We compared its performance-as stand alone or in combination with fetal biometric parameters-against 4 currently used fetal biometry formulas on a series of 3065 scans from 1992 patients undergoing second (n=1761) or third trimester (n=1298) routine ultrasound, with known gestational age estimated from crown rump length in the first trimester.
Results: Overall, 95% confidence interval of the error in gestational age estimation was 14.2 days for the artificial intelligence method alone and 11.0 when used in combination with fetal biometric parameters, compared with 12.9 days of the best method using standard biometrics alone. In the third trimester, the lower 95% confidence interval errors were 14.3 days for artificial intelligence in combination with biometric parameters and 17 days for fetal biometrics, whereas in the second trimester, the 95% confidence interval error was 6.7 and 7, respectively. The performance differences were even larger in the small-for-gestational-age fetuses group (14.8 and 18.5, respectively).
Conclusion: An automated artificial intelligence method using standard sonographic fetal planes yielded similar or lower error in gestational age estimation compared with fetal biometric parameters, especially in the third trimester. These results support further research to improve the performance of these methods in larger studies.
Keywords: artificial intelligence; fetal ultrasound; gestational age; pregnancy screening.
Copyright © 2021 Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved.
Similar articles
-
A new formula for estimating gestational age by crown-rump length.Am J Obstet Gynecol MFM. 2023 Oct;5(10):101035. doi: 10.1016/j.ajogmf.2023.101035. Epub 2023 May 28. Am J Obstet Gynecol MFM. 2023. PMID: 37247668
-
Performance of late pregnancy biometry for gestational age dating in low-income and middle-income countries: a prospective, multicountry, population-based cohort study from the WHO Alliance for Maternal and Newborn Health Improvement (AMANHI) Study Group.Lancet Glob Health. 2020 Apr;8(4):e545-e554. doi: 10.1016/S2214-109X(20)30034-6. Lancet Glob Health. 2020. PMID: 32199122 Free PMC article.
-
Artificial intelligence assistance for fetal development: evaluation of an automated software for biometry measurements in the mid-trimester.BMC Pregnancy Childbirth. 2024 Feb 23;24(1):158. doi: 10.1186/s12884-024-06336-y. BMC Pregnancy Childbirth. 2024. PMID: 38395822 Free PMC article.
-
Fetal biometry: clinical, pathological, and technical considerations.Obstet Gynecol Surv. 2001 Mar;56(3):159-67. doi: 10.1097/00006254-200103000-00023. Obstet Gynecol Surv. 2001. PMID: 11254152 Review.
-
Should a first trimester dating scan be routine for all pregnancies?Semin Perinatol. 2013 Oct;37(5):307-9. doi: 10.1053/j.semperi.2013.06.006. Semin Perinatol. 2013. PMID: 24176152 Review.
Cited by
-
Machine learning for accurate estimation of fetal gestational age based on ultrasound images.NPJ Digit Med. 2023 Mar 9;6(1):36. doi: 10.1038/s41746-023-00774-2. NPJ Digit Med. 2023. PMID: 36894653 Free PMC article.
-
Quantitative ultrasound image analysis of axillary lymph nodes to differentiate malignancy from reactive benign changes due to COVID-19 vaccination.Eur J Radiol. 2022 Sep;154:110438. doi: 10.1016/j.ejrad.2022.110438. Epub 2022 Jul 7. Eur J Radiol. 2022. PMID: 35820268 Free PMC article.
-
Evolving the Era of 5D Ultrasound? A Systematic Literature Review on the Applications for Artificial Intelligence Ultrasound Imaging in Obstetrics and Gynecology.J Clin Med. 2023 Oct 29;12(21):6833. doi: 10.3390/jcm12216833. J Clin Med. 2023. PMID: 37959298 Free PMC article. Review.
-
Application and Progress of Artificial Intelligence in Fetal Ultrasound.J Clin Med. 2023 May 5;12(9):3298. doi: 10.3390/jcm12093298. J Clin Med. 2023. PMID: 37176738 Free PMC article. Review.
-
Second and third trimester estimation of gestational age using ultrasound or maternal symphysis-fundal height measurements: A systematic review.BJOG. 2022 Aug;129(9):1447-1458. doi: 10.1111/1471-0528.17123. Epub 2022 Mar 10. BJOG. 2022. PMID: 35157348 Free PMC article.
Publication types
MeSH terms
LinkOut - more resources
Full Text Sources