Skip to main page content
U.S. flag

An official website of the United States government

Dot gov

The .gov means it’s official.
Federal government websites often end in .gov or .mil. Before sharing sensitive information, make sure you’re on a federal government site.

Https

The site is secure.
The https:// ensures that you are connecting to the official website and that any information you provide is encrypted and transmitted securely.

Access keys NCBI Homepage MyNCBI Homepage Main Content Main Navigation
. 2023 Oct;65(10):1517-1525.
doi: 10.1007/s00234-023-03193-y. Epub 2023 Jul 12.

Effect of magnet strength on fetal brain biometry - a single-center retrospective MRI-based cohort study

Shai Shrot  1   2 , Efrat Hadi  3 , Yiftach Barash  4   5 , Chen Hoffmann  4   5
Affiliations

Effect of magnet strength on fetal brain biometry - a single-center retrospective MRI-based cohort study

Shai Shrot et al. Neuroradiology. 2023 Oct.

Abstract

Purpose: Abnormal fetal brain measurements might affect clinical management and parental counseling. The effect of between-field-strength differences was not evaluated in quantitative fetal brain imaging until now. Our study aimed to compare fetal brain biometry measurements in 3.0 T with 1.5 T scanners.

Methods: A retrospective cohort of 1150 low-risk fetuses scanned between 2012 and 2021, with apparently normal brain anatomy, were retrospectively evaluated for biometric measurements. The cohort included 1.5 T (442 fetuses) and 3.0 T scans (708 fetuses) of populations with comparable characteristics in the same tertiary medical center. Manually measured biometry included bi-parietal, fronto-occipital and trans-cerebellar diameters, length of the corpus-callosum, vermis height, and width. Measurements were then converted to centiles based on previously reported biometric reference charts. The 1.5 T centiles were compared with the 3.0 T centiles.

Results: No significant differences between centiles of bi-parietal diameter, trans-cerebellar diameter, or length of the corpus callosum between 1.5 T and 3.0 T scanners were found. Small absolute differences were found in the vermis height, with higher centiles in the 3.0 T, compared to the 1.5 T scanner (54.6th-centile, vs. 39.0th-centile, p < 0.001); less significant differences were found in vermis width centiles (46.9th-centile vs. 37.5th-centile, p = 0.03). Fronto-occipital diameter was higher in 1.5 T than in the 3.0 T scanner (66.0th-centile vs. 61.8th-centile, p = 0.02).

Conclusions: The increasing use of 3.0 T MRI for fetal imaging poses a potential bias when using 1.5 T-based charts. We elucidate those biometric measurements are comparable, with relatively small between-field-strength differences, when using manual biometric measurements. Small inter-magnet differences can be related to higher spatial resolution with 3 T scanners and may be substantial when evaluating small brain structures, such as the vermis.

Keywords: Brain; Fetal development; Growth charts; Magnetic resonance imaging.

PubMed Disclaimer

Similar articles

See all similar articles

Cited by

  • Automated Craniofacial Biometry with 3D T2w Fetal MRI.
    Matthew J, Uus A, Collado AE, Luis A, Arulkumaran S, Fukami-Gartner A, Kyriakopoulou V, Cromb D, Wright R, Colford K, Deprez M, Hutter J, O'Muircheartaigh J, Malamateniou C, Razavi R, Story L, Hajnal J, Rutherford MA. Matthew J, et al. medRxiv [Preprint]. 2024 Aug 14:2024.08.13.24311408. doi: 10.1101/2024.08.13.24311408. medRxiv. 2024. Update in: PLOS Digit Health. 2024 Dec 30;3(12):e0000663. doi: 10.1371/journal.pdig.0000663. PMID: 39185514 Free PMC article. Updated. Preprint.
  • Automated craniofacial biometry with 3D T2w fetal MRI.
    Matthew J, Uus A, Egloff Collado A, Luis A, Arulkumaran S, Fukami-Gartner A, Kyriakopoulou V, Cromb D, Wright R, Colford K, Deprez M, Hutter J, O'Muircheartaigh J, Malamateniou C, Razavi R, Story L, Hajnal JV, Rutherford MA. Matthew J, et al. PLOS Digit Health. 2024 Dec 30;3(12):e0000663. doi: 10.1371/journal.pdig.0000663. eCollection 2024 Dec. PLOS Digit Health. 2024. PMID: 39774200 Free PMC article.

References

    1. Victoria T, Johnson AM, Edgar JC, Zarnow DM, Vossough A, Jaramillo D (2016) Comparison between 1.5-T and 3-T MRI for fetal imaging: is there an advantage to imaging with a higher field strength? AJR Am J Roentgenol 206:195–201 - DOI - PubMed
    1. Chapman T, Alazraki AL, Eklund MJ (2018) A survey of pediatric diagnostic radiologists in North America: current practices in fetal magnetic resonance imaging. Pediatr Radiol 48:1924–1935 - DOI - PubMed
    1. Chartier AL, Bouvier MJ, McPherson DR, Stepenosky JE, Taysom DA, Marks RM (2019) The safety of maternal and fetal MRI at 3 T. AJR Am J Roentgenol 213:1170–1173 - DOI - PubMed
    1. Jaimes C, Delgado J, Cunnane MB, Hedrick HL, Adzick NS, Gee MS, Victoria T (2019) 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. Pediatr Radiol 49:37–45 - DOI - PubMed
    1. Kyriakopoulou V, Vatansever D, Davidson A, Patkee P, Elkommos S, Chew A, Martinez-Biarge M, Hagberg B, Damodaram M, Allsop J, Fox M, Hajnal JV, Rutherford MA (2017) Normative biometry of the fetal brain using magnetic resonance imaging. Brain Struct Funct 222:2295–2307 - DOI - PubMed

LinkOut - more resources