Using cerebral ultrasound effectively in the newborn infant
Introduction
Cranial ultrasound (cUS) is the most readily available and easily repeatable technique for imaging the neonatal brain. In contrast to other neuro-imaging tools such as magnetic resonance imaging (MRI) and computed tomography (CT), it can be done bedside with little disturbance to the infant. Neonatal cUS has been used for over 25 years and early studies on intraventricular (IVH) and parenchymal haemorrhage (HPI), post-haemorrhagic ventricular dilatation and cystic periventricular leukomalacia (PVL) have helped greatly our understanding of risk factors for neurodevelopmental abnormalities. Advances in technology have improved the quality of cUS imaging such that it can be a reliable tool for following brain development and showing the most frequently occurring forms of cerebral injury in the preterm and term born infant brain. The range of cUS diagnoses has increased with the recognition of more subtle patterns of injury and the appreciation of features suggestive of developmental, metabolic and infectious disorders.
In recent years concerns have been raised that cUS is not able to detect more subtle abnormality in the preterm infant [1], [2], [3], [4] and that it is not reliable for detecting lesions in the term infant with HIE and focal infarction. The arrival of MRI with its multi-slice coverage of the whole brain and large range of sequences has led a very negative press as far as cUS is concerned. This negativity is not well supported by comparative studies where both techniques receive the same time and expertise regarding image acquisition and analysis [5], [6].
The quality of cUS imaging and its diagnostic accuracy, as with any other imaging technique, depends on many factors. These include not only the suitability of the equipment for neonatal cranial work and the use of appropriate settings and probes, but also scanning at appropriate times depending on the pathology being sought, the use of different acoustic windows and not least the experience and expertise of the examiner.
This review assesses the value of appropriate timing of modern, high-quality cUS in evaluating both the preterm and term born infant brain and highlights the current areas of emphasis in this important field of neonatal medicine.
Section snippets
Scanning protocols
There are some technical guidelines on scanning quality and image acquisition [7] but there is no universal agreement about optimal timing for neonatal cUS. Scanning protocols vary considerably between different neonatal units. This variability reflects the different purposes for scanning which include diagnosis, assessing aetiology and predicting outcome, and the population of infants examined, imaging skills and interest of the examiner, the availability of an ultrasound scanner on the
Acoustic windows
The standard acoustic window used for imaging the neonatal brain is the anterior fontanelle. However, the cerebellum, brainstem and posterior subcortical WM may be poorly visualized using this approach. The detection of cerebellar abnormality via the anterior fontanelle is complicated by the echogenic appearance of the tentorium and cerebellar vermis. The cerebellum is increasingly recognized as an important structure not only for motor control but also for cognitive and behavioural
Safety
Although sequential cUS is clearly very important, its potential hazards and burden for the often sick and unstable newborn infant should be kept in mind. These include extra handling, applying pressure and cold gel to the fontanelle, the risk of dislodging tubes or lines or introducing infection from equipment that is not kept clean or from the operator. Most of these issues are relatively easy to prevent when appropriate safety and hygienic precautions are taken. All ultrasound equipment for
Teaching and experience and accuracy of cUS
Many studies have cast doubt on the accuracy of cUS for detecting cerebral abnormalities predictive of unfavourable outcome. Some have suggested that only in 40–50% of preterm infants with CP [38], [39], lesions were detectable on cUS though this contention is not supported by the study of De Vries [14]. Few studies have assessed the skills of the examiner and interpreter. In a study [4] comparing cUS and MRI no major lesions were missed on cUS [1], [2], [3] though subtle WM change on cUS and
Conclusions
Current evidence is that cUS imaging using modern machines, probes, a variety of acoustic windows and sequential scanning at optimal times gives high-quality images that are diagnostically accurate. Issues of teaching, supervision and experience for both paediatric and radiological staff need to be addressed and collaboration between paediatric and radiology departments is needed to improve protocols, image quality and interpretation. Whilst MRI does have advantages over cUS and clear clinical
References (42)
- et al.
Ultrasound abnormalities preceding cerebral palsy in high-risk preterm infants
J Pediatr
(2004) - et al.
The role of cranial ultrasound and magnetic resonance imaging in the diagnosis of infections of the central nervous system
Early Hum Dev
(2006) - et al.
Can clinical signs identify newborns with neuromuscular disorders?
J Pediatr
(2005) - et al.
Effects of frequent ultrasound during pregnancy: a randomised controlled trial
Lancet
(1993) - et al.
Comparing the diagnosis of white matter injury in premature newborns with serial MR imaging and transfontanel ultrasonography findings
AJNR
(2003) - et al.
Limitations of ultrasonography for diagnosing white matter damage in preterm infants
Arch Dis Child Fetal Neonatal Ed
(2003) - et al.
Neonatal brain magnetic resonance imaging before discharge is better than serial cranial ultrasound in predicting cerebral palsy in very low birth weight preterm infants
Pediatrics
(2004) - et al.
Comparison of findings on cranial ultrasound and magnetic resonance imaging in preterm infants
Pediatrics
(2001) - et al.
Does cranial ultrasound imaging identify arterial cerebral infarction in term neonates?
Arch Dis Child Fetal Neonatal Ed
(2005) - et al.
Imaging of the brain in full term infants: does sonography still play a role?
Pediatr Radiol
(2006)
Technical standard — neonatal cranial ultrasound scans
Posterior fontanelle sonography: an acoustic window into the neonatal brain
AJNR Am J Neuroradiol
Cerebellar haemorrhage in the preterm infant: ultrasonographic findings and risk factors
Pediatrics
Disruption of cerebellar development: potential complication of extreme prematurity
AJNR Am J Neuroradiol
Smaller cerebellar volumes in very preterm infants at term-equivalent age are associated with the presence of supratentorial lesions
AJNR Am J Neuroradiol
Surveillance protocol for the detection of intracranial abnormalities in premature neonates
Arch Pediatr Adolesc Med
Practice parameter: neuroimaging of the neonate: report of the Quality Standards Subcommittee of the American Academy of Neurology and the Practice Committee of the Child Neurology Society
Neurology
Antenatal onset of haemorrhagic and/or ischaemic lesions in preterm infants
Arch Dis Child
Ultrasound diagnosis and neurodevelopmental outcome of localised and extensive cystic periventricular leucomalacia
Arch Dis Child Fetal Neonatal Ed
Ultrasound diagnosis of brain atrophy is related to neurodevelopmental outcome in preterm infants
Acta Paediatr
Detection of impaired growth of the corpus callosum in premature infants
Pediatrics
Cited by (76)
Cranial Ultrasound Screening Protocols for Very Preterm Infants
2021, Ultrasound in Medicine and BiologyCitation Excerpt :Table 2 outlines the ultrasound examination timing recommended by each study. There was a considerable difference between the numbers of ultrasound examinations recommended particularly in the European studies, which advocated for weekly examinations throughout the neonatal period until TEA (de Vries 2004; Leijser et al. 2006; Hintz and O'Shea 2008; Leijser et al. 2009, 2010; Van Wezel-Meijler et al. 2010; de Vries et al. 2011; Van Wezel-Meijler et al. 2011; van Wezel-Meijler and de Vries 2014; Plaisier et al. 2015; Meijler and Steggerda 2019). It was recommended that any abnormal findings found during routine screening be followed up using ultrasound and/or MRI to monitor the evolution of the abnormality.
Linking acute symptomatic neonatal seizures, brain injury and outcome in preterm infants
2020, Epilepsy and BehaviorOutcome in preterm infants with seizures
2019, Handbook of Clinical NeurologyPractical guide to neonatal cranial ultrasound (CrUS): basics
2018, Paediatrics and Child Health (United Kingdom)Evaluation of the human newborn infant
2018, Handbook of Developmental NeurotoxicologyEarly diagnosis and outcome prediction of neonatal hypoxic-ischemic encephalopathy with color Doppler ultrasound
2017, Diagnostic and Interventional Imaging
- 1
Current address: Department of Paediatrics, Division of Neonatology, Leiden University Medical Center, Albinusdreef 2, P.O. Box 9600, 2300 RC Leiden, The Netherlands. Tel.: +31 71 5262909; fax: +31 71 5248199.