State of art of MRI of fetal heart

• Authors: Lucia Manganaro
• Languages of publication: EN

Abstracts

EN

Congenital heart defect (CHD) is one of the most common type of fetal malformations. Tissue-Doppler imaging, dynamic threedimensional (4D) echocardiography and fetal cardiac magnetic resonance imaging (MRI) are advanced modalities for the assessment of cardiac structure and function. MRI can study the cardiac morphology using T2-weighted half-Fourier single-shot turbo spin-echo sequence (HASTE) and steady-state free precession (True FISP) sequences. Also a dynamic study can be performed, through the acquisition of cine-MR sequences with real-time steady-state free precession (SSFP) oriented according to the standard projections used in fetal echocardiographic scanning. If the challenges relating to motion and cardiac gating can be overcome, MRI has the potential to provide high-resolution imaging of the fetal heart.

Keywords

EN

magnetic resonance imaging; MRI; fetal heart defects; CHD

• Publisher: De Gruyter Open
• Journal: Prenatal Cardiology
• Year: 2015
• Volume: 5
• Issue: 3
• Pages: 9-12

Dates

published

1 - 9 - 2015

received

27 - 9 - 2015

accepted

28 - 9 - 2015

online

30 - 12 - 2015

Contributors

author

Lucia Manganaro

• Department of Radiological Oncological and Anatomopathological Sciences, Umberto I Hospital, “Sapienza” University of Rome

References

• 1. Sandaite I, S Dymarkowski, L De Catte, P Moerman, M Gewillig, L Fedele, J Deprest, F Claus. 2014. “Fetal heart pathology on postmortem 3-T magnetic resonance imaging”. Prenat Diagn. 34 (3): 223-229
• 2. Poutamo J, K Partanen, R Vanninen, P Vainio, P Kirkinen. 1998. “MRI does not change fetal cardiotocographic parameters”. Prenat Diagn 18 (11): 1149-1154
• 3. Michel SCA, A Rake, TM Keller, et al. 2003. “Fetal cardiographic monitoring during 1.5-T MR imaging”. AJR 180: 1159-1164
• 4. De Wilde JP, AW Rivers, DL Price. 2005. “A review of the current use of magnetic resonance imaging in pregnancy and safety implications for the fetus”. Prog Biophys Mol Biol 87: 335-353[Crossref]
• 5. Holsinger AE, RC Wright, SJ Riederer, F Farzaneh, RC Grimm, JK Maier. 1990. “Real-time interactive magnetic resonance imaging”. Magn Reson Med 14 (3): 547-553[Crossref]
• 6. Naganawa S, T Ishiguchi, T Ishigaki, K Sato, T Katagiri, H Kishimoto, T Mimura, O Takizawa, C Imura. 2000. “Real-time interactive MR imaging system: sequence optimization, and basic and clinical evaluations”. Radiat Med. 18 (1): 71-79
• 7. Deng J, CH Rodeck. 2004. “New fetal cardiac imaging techniques”. Prenat Diagn 24: 1092-1103
• 8. Kastler B. 2004. “Value of MRI in the evaluation of congenital anomalies of the heart and great vessels”. J Radiol 85: 1851-1853[Crossref]
• 9. Gorincour G, B Bourlié Re-Najean, B Bonello et al. 2005. “Feasibility of fetal cardiac magnetic resonance imaging: preliminary experience”. Ultrasound Obstet Gynecol 29: 105-110[WoS][Crossref]
• 10. Carr JC, A Shaibani, E Russell, JP Finn. 2001. “Contrast-enhanced magnetic resonance angiography of the carotid circulation”. Top Magn Reson Imaging 12 (5): 349-357[Crossref]
• 11. Manganaro L, S Savelli, M Di Maurizio, A Perrone, J Tesei, A Francioso, M Angeletti, F Coratella, D Irimia, F Fierro, F Ventriglia, L Ballesio. 2008. “Potential role of fetal cardiac evaluation with magnetic resonance imaging: preliminary experience”. Prenat Diagn 28:148-156
• 12. Manganaro L, S Savelli, M Di Maurizio, A Perrone, A Francioso, L La Barbera, P Totaro, F Fierro, A Tomei, F Coratella, A Giancotti, L Ballesio, F Ventriglia. 2009. “Assessment of congenital heart disease (CHD): Is there a role for fetal magnetic resonance imaging (MRI)?”. Eur J Radiol 72 (1): 172-180[Crossref]
• 13. Votino C, J Jani, N Damry, H Dessy, X Kang, T Cos, L Divano, W Foulon, J De Mey, M Cannie. 2012. “Magnetic resonance imaging in the normal fetal heart and in congenital heart disease”. Ultrasound Obstet Gynecol 39 (3): 322-329[Crossref]
• 14. Nemec SF, PC Brugger, U Nemec, D Bettelheim, G Kasprian, G Amann, DL Rimoin, JM Jraham Jr, D Prayer. 2012. “Situs anomalies on prenatal MRI”. Eur J Radiol 81(4): 495-501 [WoS][Crossref]

Identifiers

DOI

10.12847/09152