Post mortem magnetic resonance imaging in the fetus, infant and child: A comparative study with conventional autopsy (MaRIAS Protocol)
<p>Abstract</p> <p>Background</p> <p>Minimally invasive autopsy by post mortem magnetic resonance (MR) imaging has been suggested as an alternative for conventional autopsy in view of the declining consented autopsy rates. However, large prospective studies rigorously e...
| Main Authors: | , , , , , , , , , , , |
|---|---|
| Format: | Article |
| Language: | English |
| Published: |
BMC
2011-12-01
|
| Series: | BMC Pediatrics |
| Subjects: | |
| Online Access: | http://www.biomedcentral.com/1471-2431/11/120 |
| _version_ | 1819029573167218688 |
|---|---|
| author | Thayyil Sudhin Sebire Neil J Chitty Lyn S Wade Angie Olsen Oystein Gunny Roxana S Offiah Amaka Saunders Dawn E Owens Catherine M Chong WK 'Kling' Robertson Nicola J Taylor Andrew M |
| author_facet | Thayyil Sudhin Sebire Neil J Chitty Lyn S Wade Angie Olsen Oystein Gunny Roxana S Offiah Amaka Saunders Dawn E Owens Catherine M Chong WK 'Kling' Robertson Nicola J Taylor Andrew M |
| author_sort | Thayyil Sudhin |
| collection | DOAJ |
| description | <p>Abstract</p> <p>Background</p> <p>Minimally invasive autopsy by post mortem magnetic resonance (MR) imaging has been suggested as an alternative for conventional autopsy in view of the declining consented autopsy rates. However, large prospective studies rigorously evaluating the accuracy of such an approach are lacking. We intend to compare the accuracy of a minimally invasive autopsy approach using post mortem MR imaging with that of conventional autopsy in fetuses, newborns and children for detection of the major pathological abnormalities and/or determination of the cause of death.</p> <p>Methods/Design</p> <p>We recruited 400 consecutive fetuses, newborns and children referred for conventional autopsy to one of the two participating hospitals over a three-year period. We acquired whole body post mortem MR imaging using a 1.5 T MR scanner (Avanto, Siemens Medical Solutions, Enlargen, Germany) prior to autopsy. The total scan time varied between 90 to 120 minutes. Each MR image was reported by a team of four specialist radiologists (paediatric neuroradiology, paediatric cardiology, paediatric chest & abdominal imaging and musculoskeletal imaging), blinded to the autopsy data. Conventional autopsy was performed according to the guidelines set down by the Royal College of Pathologists (UK) by experienced paediatric or perinatal pathologists, blinded to the MR data. The MR and autopsy data were recorded using predefined categorical variables by an independent person.</p> <p>Discussion</p> <p>Using conventional post mortem as the gold standard comparator, the MR images will be assessed for accuracy of the anatomical morphology, associated lesions, clinical usefulness of information and determination of the cause of death. The sensitivities, specificities and predictive values of post mortem MR alone and MR imaging along with other minimally invasive post mortem investigations will be presented for the final diagnosis, broad diagnostic categories and for specific diagnosis of each system.</p> <p>Clinical Trial Registration</p> <p><a href="http://www.clinicaltrials.gov/ct2/show/NCT01417962">NCT01417962</a></p> <p><b>NIHR Portfolio Number: </b>6794</p> |
| first_indexed | 2024-12-21T06:16:24Z |
| format | Article |
| id | doaj.art-0b63e13a7f28428a952fcfcdb92d9bf1 |
| institution | Directory Open Access Journal |
| issn | 1471-2431 |
| language | English |
| last_indexed | 2024-12-21T06:16:24Z |
| publishDate | 2011-12-01 |
| publisher | BMC |
| record_format | Article |
| series | BMC Pediatrics |
| spelling | doaj.art-0b63e13a7f28428a952fcfcdb92d9bf12022-12-21T19:13:23ZengBMCBMC Pediatrics1471-24312011-12-0111112010.1186/1471-2431-11-120Post mortem magnetic resonance imaging in the fetus, infant and child: A comparative study with conventional autopsy (MaRIAS Protocol)Thayyil SudhinSebire Neil JChitty Lyn SWade AngieOlsen OysteinGunny Roxana SOffiah AmakaSaunders Dawn EOwens Catherine MChong WK 'Kling'Robertson Nicola JTaylor Andrew M<p>Abstract</p> <p>Background</p> <p>Minimally invasive autopsy by post mortem magnetic resonance (MR) imaging has been suggested as an alternative for conventional autopsy in view of the declining consented autopsy rates. However, large prospective studies rigorously evaluating the accuracy of such an approach are lacking. We intend to compare the accuracy of a minimally invasive autopsy approach using post mortem MR imaging with that of conventional autopsy in fetuses, newborns and children for detection of the major pathological abnormalities and/or determination of the cause of death.</p> <p>Methods/Design</p> <p>We recruited 400 consecutive fetuses, newborns and children referred for conventional autopsy to one of the two participating hospitals over a three-year period. We acquired whole body post mortem MR imaging using a 1.5 T MR scanner (Avanto, Siemens Medical Solutions, Enlargen, Germany) prior to autopsy. The total scan time varied between 90 to 120 minutes. Each MR image was reported by a team of four specialist radiologists (paediatric neuroradiology, paediatric cardiology, paediatric chest & abdominal imaging and musculoskeletal imaging), blinded to the autopsy data. Conventional autopsy was performed according to the guidelines set down by the Royal College of Pathologists (UK) by experienced paediatric or perinatal pathologists, blinded to the MR data. The MR and autopsy data were recorded using predefined categorical variables by an independent person.</p> <p>Discussion</p> <p>Using conventional post mortem as the gold standard comparator, the MR images will be assessed for accuracy of the anatomical morphology, associated lesions, clinical usefulness of information and determination of the cause of death. The sensitivities, specificities and predictive values of post mortem MR alone and MR imaging along with other minimally invasive post mortem investigations will be presented for the final diagnosis, broad diagnostic categories and for specific diagnosis of each system.</p> <p>Clinical Trial Registration</p> <p><a href="http://www.clinicaltrials.gov/ct2/show/NCT01417962">NCT01417962</a></p> <p><b>NIHR Portfolio Number: </b>6794</p>http://www.biomedcentral.com/1471-2431/11/120Autopsypost mortem magnetic resonance imagingstillbirthsudden infant deathdiagnostic studyminimally invasive autopsy |
| spellingShingle | Thayyil Sudhin Sebire Neil J Chitty Lyn S Wade Angie Olsen Oystein Gunny Roxana S Offiah Amaka Saunders Dawn E Owens Catherine M Chong WK 'Kling' Robertson Nicola J Taylor Andrew M Post mortem magnetic resonance imaging in the fetus, infant and child: A comparative study with conventional autopsy (MaRIAS Protocol) BMC Pediatrics Autopsy post mortem magnetic resonance imaging stillbirth sudden infant death diagnostic study minimally invasive autopsy |
| title | Post mortem magnetic resonance imaging in the fetus, infant and child: A comparative study with conventional autopsy (MaRIAS Protocol) |
| title_full | Post mortem magnetic resonance imaging in the fetus, infant and child: A comparative study with conventional autopsy (MaRIAS Protocol) |
| title_fullStr | Post mortem magnetic resonance imaging in the fetus, infant and child: A comparative study with conventional autopsy (MaRIAS Protocol) |
| title_full_unstemmed | Post mortem magnetic resonance imaging in the fetus, infant and child: A comparative study with conventional autopsy (MaRIAS Protocol) |
| title_short | Post mortem magnetic resonance imaging in the fetus, infant and child: A comparative study with conventional autopsy (MaRIAS Protocol) |
| title_sort | post mortem magnetic resonance imaging in the fetus infant and child a comparative study with conventional autopsy marias protocol |
| topic | Autopsy post mortem magnetic resonance imaging stillbirth sudden infant death diagnostic study minimally invasive autopsy |
| url | http://www.biomedcentral.com/1471-2431/11/120 |
| work_keys_str_mv | AT thayyilsudhin postmortemmagneticresonanceimaginginthefetusinfantandchildacomparativestudywithconventionalautopsymariasprotocol AT sebireneilj postmortemmagneticresonanceimaginginthefetusinfantandchildacomparativestudywithconventionalautopsymariasprotocol AT chittylyns postmortemmagneticresonanceimaginginthefetusinfantandchildacomparativestudywithconventionalautopsymariasprotocol AT wadeangie postmortemmagneticresonanceimaginginthefetusinfantandchildacomparativestudywithconventionalautopsymariasprotocol AT olsenoystein postmortemmagneticresonanceimaginginthefetusinfantandchildacomparativestudywithconventionalautopsymariasprotocol AT gunnyroxanas postmortemmagneticresonanceimaginginthefetusinfantandchildacomparativestudywithconventionalautopsymariasprotocol AT offiahamaka postmortemmagneticresonanceimaginginthefetusinfantandchildacomparativestudywithconventionalautopsymariasprotocol AT saundersdawne postmortemmagneticresonanceimaginginthefetusinfantandchildacomparativestudywithconventionalautopsymariasprotocol AT owenscatherinem postmortemmagneticresonanceimaginginthefetusinfantandchildacomparativestudywithconventionalautopsymariasprotocol AT chongwkkling postmortemmagneticresonanceimaginginthefetusinfantandchildacomparativestudywithconventionalautopsymariasprotocol AT robertsonnicolaj postmortemmagneticresonanceimaginginthefetusinfantandchildacomparativestudywithconventionalautopsymariasprotocol AT taylorandrewm postmortemmagneticresonanceimaginginthefetusinfantandchildacomparativestudywithconventionalautopsymariasprotocol |