4.6 Article

Accuracy of fetal echocardiography: a cardiac segment-specific analysis

Journal

ULTRASOUND IN OBSTETRICS & GYNECOLOGY
Volume 28, Issue 1, Pages 15-21

Publisher

JOHN WILEY & SONS LTD
DOI: 10.1002/uog.2795

Keywords

accuracy; congenital heart disease; fetal echocardiography; quality assurance

Ask authors/readers for more resources

Objective In patients with congenital heart disease, comprehensive, segment-specific analysis of cardiac anatomy has become 'the standard of care', largely as a result of improvements in cardiac imaging technology. Our aim was to apply segment-specific standards to assess the accuracy of fetal echocardiography. Methods This was a retrospective review of all fetal echocardiograms (n = 915) performed at our center between August 1998 and June 2003. Of these, 100 studies bad congenital heart disease findings and corresponding postnatal studies on the same patients for comparison. An expert independent pediatric echocardiologist, using the standards of accuracy expected of postnatal echocardiography, assessed the studies for the following cardiac segments: abdominal situs, systemic venous return (VR), pulmonary VR, atria, atrioventricular valves, ventricular septum, ventricular hypoplasia, ventricular morphology, semilunar valves, great arterial relation and aortic arch. Sensitivity, specificity, and positive and negative predictive values were calculated for each segment. Results Specificity and negative predictive value were high for all cardiac segments (range, 82-100%). Sensitivity and positive predictive value were similarly high (range, 83-100%) for most cardiac segments, but were only 50-88% for systemic VR, pulmonary VR and aortic arch segments. Conclusions Fetal echocardiography has excellent diagnostic accuracy in describing intracardiac anatomy. However, despite both technological advances and improved physician awareness, assessment of systemic VR, pulmonary VR, and aortic arch anatomy remain challenging. Copyright (c) 2006 ISUOG. Published by John Wiley & Sons, Ltd.

Authors

I am an author on this paper
Click your name to claim this paper and add it to your profile.

Reviews

Primary Rating

4.6
Not enough ratings

Secondary Ratings

Novelty
-
Significance
-
Scientific rigor
-
Rate this paper

Recommended

No Data Available
No Data Available