Cerebral magnetic resonance imaging (MRI) of very low birth weight infants at one year of corrected age

1992 ◽  
Vol 22 (6) ◽  
pp. 406-409 ◽  
Author(s):  
J. S. Skranes ◽  
G. Nilsen ◽  
O. Smevik ◽  
T. Vik ◽  
P. Rinck ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Magnetic Resonance Imaging ◽  
Birth Weight ◽  
Magnetic Resonance ◽  
Low Birth Weight ◽  
Very Low Birth Weight ◽  
Resonance Imaging ◽  
Low Birth Weight Infants ◽  
Cerebral Magnetic Resonance Imaging ◽  
Magnetic Resonance Imaging Mri ◽  
One Year

scholarly journals Neurophysiologic Profiling of At-Risk Low and Very Low Birth-Weight Infants Using Magnetic Resonance Imaging

2021 ◽  
Vol 12 ◽  
Author(s):  
Ying Qi ◽  
Jingni He
Keyword(s):  
Magnetic Resonance Imaging ◽  
Birth Weight ◽  
Magnetic Resonance ◽  
Low Birth Weight ◽  
Brain Injuries ◽  
Very Low Birth Weight ◽  
Oxygen Extraction Fraction ◽  
Resonance Imaging ◽  
Low Birth Weight Infants ◽  
Brain Physiology

Low birth-weight (LBW) and very low birth-weight (VLBW) newborns have increased risks of brain injuries, growth failure, motor difficulties, developmental coordination disorders or delay, and adult-onset vascular diseases. However, relatively little is known of the neurobiologic underpinnings. To clarify the pathophysiologic vulnerabilities of such neonates, we applied several advanced techniques for assessing brain physiology, namely T2-relaxation-under-spin-tagging (TRUST) magnetic resonance imaging (MRI) and phase-contrast (PC) MRI. This enabled quantification of oxygen extraction fraction (OEF), global cerebral blood flow (CBF), and cerebral metabolic rate of oxygen (CMRO2). A total of 50 neonates (LBW-VLBW, 41; term controls, 9) participated in this study. LBW-VLBW neonates were further stratified as those with (LBW-VLBW-a, 24) and without (LBW-VLBW-n, 17) structural MRI (sMRI) abnormalities. TRUST and PC MRI studies were undertaken to determine OEF, CBF, and CMRO2. Ultimately, CMRO2 proved significantly lower (p = 0.01) in LBW-VLBW (vs term) neonates, both LBW-VLBW-a and LBW-VLBW-n subsets showing significantly greater physiologic deficits than term controls (p = 0.03 and p = 0.04, respectively). CMRO2 and CBF in LBW-VLBW-a and LBW-VLBW-n subsets did not differ significantly (p > 0.05), although OEF showed a tendency to diverge (p = 0.15). However, OEF values in the LBW-VLBW-n subset differed significantly from those of term controls (p = 0.02). Compared with brain volume or body weight, these physiologic parameters yield higher area-under-the-curve (AUC) values for distinguishing neonates of the LBW-VLBW-a subset. The latter displayed distinct cerebral metabolic and hemodynamic, whereas changes were marginal in the LBW-VLBW-n subset (i.e., higher OEF and lower CBF and CMRO2) by comparison. Physiologic imaging may therefore be useful in identifying LBW-VLBW newborns at high risk of irreversible brain damage.

scholarly journals Implementation of the Feed and Swaddle Technique as a Non-Pharmacological Strategy to Conduct Brain Magnetic Resonance Imaging in Very Low Birth Weight Infants

2021 ◽  
Vol 28 (3) ◽  
pp. 108-115
Author(s):  
Yeong Myong Yoo ◽  
Ji Eun Park ◽  
Moon Sung Park ◽  
Jang Hoon Lee
Keyword(s):  
Magnetic Resonance Imaging ◽  
Birth Weight ◽  
Magnetic Resonance ◽  
Low Birth Weight ◽  
Adverse Events ◽  
Very Low Birth Weight ◽  
Resonance Imaging ◽  
Low Birth Weight Infants ◽  
Improvement Project ◽  
Sedation Group

Purpose: Magnetic resonance imaging (MRI) is a useful tool for evaluating brain injury and maturation in preterm infants and often requires sedation to acquire images of sufficient quality. Infant sedation is often associated with adverse events, despite extreme precautions. In this study, the swaddling technique was investigated as an alternative non-pharmacological strategy to obtain brain MRIs of sufficient quality.Methods: We applied the feed and swaddle technique during routine brain MRI as a quality improvement project and compared its morbidity with that of sedation in a historic age-matched group. Seventy-nine very low birth weight infants in the neonatal intensive care unit of Ajou University Hospital (Suwon, Korea) were enrolled. Thirty-two (40.5%) infants were in the feed and swaddling group, and 47 (59.5%) were in the sedation group.Results: The morbidity associated with the cardiopulmonary system (swaddling group vs. sedation group: 53.13% [n=17] vs. 63.83% [n=30], P=0.723) and central nervous system (40.63% [n=13] vs. 29.79% [n=14], P=0.217) were not significantly different between groups. The MRI failure rate was not significantly different (swaddling group vs. sedation group: 12.5% [n=4] vs. 4.3% [n=2], P=0.174). The MRI scanning time was longer in the swaddling group than in the sedation group (76.5±20.3 minutes vs. 61.5±13.6 minutes, P=0.001). Cardiopulmonary adverse events were significantly less common in the swaddling group than in the sedation group (3.13% [n=1] vs. 34.04% [n=16], P=0.002).Conclusion: The success rate of MRI was comparable between the swaddling technique and sedation. Furthermore, despite the drawback of prolonged scan time, cardiopulmonary adverse events are fewer with swaddling than with sedative agents. Therefore, swaddling can be an alternative to sedation or anesthesia when performing neonatal MRI scans.

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document