eLetters is an online forum for ongoing peer review. To submit an eLetter please go to the article you wish to respond to and click on the link that reads "eLetters: Submit a Response." Submission of eLetters are open to all health care professionals and experts in related fields.

eLetters to:

ARTICLE:
Majid Mirmiran, Patrick D. Barnes, Kathy Keller, Janet C. Constantinou, Barry E. Fleisher, Susan R. Hintz, and Ronald L. Ariagno
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; 114: 992-998 [Abstract] [Full text] [PDF]
*eLetters: Submit a response to this article

eLetters published:

[Read eLetters] Is MRI really better than cranial ultrasound for predicting cerebral palsy in preterm infants?
Linda de Vries, Frances Cowan   (27 October 2004)
[Read eLetters] MRI is better than cranial ultrasound for predicting cerebral palsy in preterm infants
Majid Mirmiran, Patrick D. Barnes and Ronald L. Ariagno   (29 October 2004)

Is MRI really better than cranial ultrasound for predicting cerebral palsy in preterm infants? 27 October 2004
 Next eLetters Top
Linda de Vries,
Neonatal Neurologist
Wilhelmina Children's Hospital. Utrecht, Netherlands,
Frances Cowan

Send letter to journal:
Re: Is MRI really better than cranial ultrasound for predicting cerebral palsy in preterm infants?

L.deVries{at}azu.nl Linda de Vries, et al.

To the Editor.—

We read, with interest, the paper in Pediatrics by Mirmiran and colleagues (1) on the comparison of neonatal brain magnetic resonance imaging (MRI) and cranial ultrasound (US) in predicting cerebral palsy (CP) in very low birth weight (VLBW) infants. The authors are to be congratulated on publishing outcome data up to 31 months relating to MRI findings in preterm neonates.

Whilst their reported finding, that MRI at near-term in VLBW preterm neonates is superior to US in predicting outcome, might be true one, we question whether the study protocol allowed for a fair comparison between the two techniques.

The authors only obtained US scans in the first 1-2 weeks after birth except at the discretion of the attending physician. Such limited US scanning in a study designed to assess the prognostic information available from US is hard to understand. It is well known that localised cystic periventricular leukomalacia (PVL) may appear beyond day 28 in more than half of cases (2,3) and that infants with late onset cystic PVL usually have normal initial US findings before they deteriorate later following sepsis or necrotising enterocolitis (4). In our own study on 1460 infants under 33 weeks gestational age at birth (2) US was performed on a weekly basis till discharge and again at 40 weeks postmenstrual age irrespective of imaging data obtained during the first two weeks. We found scan abnormalities in over 90% of children who developed CP, which were major in 83%.

Whilst we are informed in detail about the MRI data in relation to later development of CP, no data are provided about the children with normal US findings and later development of CP. Looking at the MRI data in table 3, it is most likely, in view of the US protocol, that the two children with PVL were not detected with US, but this would still not reduce the sensitivity to the values shown in figure 2.

The quality of the US images can also not be assessed by the reader as none were provided. In a study dedicated to assessing US we are surprised that the journal editors do not insist that the US scans from the infants in whom lesions were missed are shown. One is left uncertain as to whether the lesions were not detectable, or whether the scans were either not of sufficient quality or they were not obtained at the right time to detect the lesions. All the abnormalities pointed out in the MRI scans shown should be seen on high quality US.

Some of the limitations of the study are given in the discussion. Obtaining US and MRI on the same day should have been a mandatory part of the study protocol. In our study 4 children first showed cystic PVL lesions when examined again at 40 weeks postmenstrual age (2). It is true, that others who performed both techniques on the same day did show that US was not good in recognising subtle white matter lesions, but as no follow- up data are available as yet, one does not know, whether these subtle white matter lesions did indeed lead to subsequent development of CP. Preliminary data (5) indicate that subtle abnormalities of white matter may relate to poorer cognitive outcome but not CP We are surprised by the authors’ argument that it is not useful to assess myelination. In our experience this is one of the most useful features of a scan at term age but necessitates that the MRI is not obtained before at least 38 weeks. The presence/absence or asymmetry of myelination at the level of the posterior limb of the internal capsule (6), is especially helpful in the early prediction of hemiplegia following a unilateral parenchymal hemorrhage and likely relevant to the case depicted in Fig 1 A and B. The authors make no mention of assessing lesion site – cysts in the anterior white matter will not lead to CP – as shown in Fig 1 G and H and it is not helpful to group all abnormality together regardless of site to predict a specific outcome.

It may well be true that more subtle abnormalities such as diffuse excessive high signal intensity (DEHSI) in white matter together with the use of diffusion tensor imaging and volumetric studies may be more informative about cognitive outcomes but as yet we remain to be convinced that MRI is superior to high quality US in predicting CP in the majority of preterm infants. Before a recommendation can be given about performing MRI in all VLBW infants near term age, a fair comparison between MRI and US should be performed, using both methods optimally.

LINDA DE VRIES MD Wilhelmina Children’s Hospital University Medical Centre PO box 85090 3508 AB Utrecht, Netherlands

FRANCES COWAN MRCPCH PhD Dept of Paediatrics Imperial College Hammersmith Hospital London W12 ONN, UK

REFERENCES

1. Mirmiran M, Barnes PD, Keller K, Constantinou JC, Fleisher BE, Hintz SR, Ariagno RL 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;114:992- 8.

2 De Vries LS, van Haastert IC, Rademaker KJ, Koopman C, Groenendaal F. Ultrasound abnormalities preceding cerebral palsy in high-risk preterm infants. J Pediatr 2004; 144:815-20

3. Pierrat V, Duqennoy C, van Haastert IC, Ernst M, Guilley N, de Vries LS. Ultrasound diagnosis and neurodevelopmental outcome of localised and extensive cystic periventricular leukomalacia. Arch Dis Child Neon Fetal Ed 2001; 84:F151-6.

4.Andre P, Thebaud B, Delavaucoupet J, Zupan V, Blanc N, d'Allest AM et al. Late-onset cystic periventricular leukomalacia in premature infants: a threat until term. Am J Perinatol 2001; 18:79-86.

5. Dyet L, Kennea NL, Counsell S, Duggan PJ, Allsop J, Maalouf E, Cowan F, Rutherford M, Edwards AD. Diffuse white matter abnormalities on magnetic resonance imaging of the brain in preterm infants and neurodevelopmental outcome. Pediatr Research 2004;55(4):424A

6. De Vries LS, Groenendaal F, Eken P, Rademaker KJ, Meiners LC. Asymmetrical myelination of the posterior limb of the internal capsule: an early predictor of hemiplegia. Neuropediatrics 1999; 30:314-9

MRI is better than cranial ultrasound for predicting cerebral palsy in preterm infants 29 October 2004
Previous eLetters  Top
Majid Mirmiran,
MD, PhD.
Dept. Pediatrics, Stanford University,
Patrick D. Barnes and Ronald L. Ariagno

Send letter to journal:
Re: MRI is better than cranial ultrasound for predicting cerebral palsy in preterm infants

mirmiran{at}stanford.edu Majid Mirmiran, et al.

We understand the position of Dr. Linda de Vries, although she is not a radiologist, she has great expertise in reading infants cranial ultrasound (US). We feel that the neonatology and pediatric radiology are moving towards MRI as a better technology in brain imaging. There is no doubt in the mind of a MR physicist that the quality of image obtained by MRI is far greater than US. There is no way that US can show anatomy of the brain with great detail found in MRI. Particularly complete MRI series including GRE, FLAIR, DTI, T1 and T2 images. Certainly this is not a time to sell an old hat because it is easier/cheaper when we are facing among VLBW preterm infants with a large number of children at high risk for developing CP that remain undetected during the neonatal period. In conclusion of our target paper (Mirmiran M. et al., Pediatrics 2004) we have offered the following revision to the neuroimaging practice parameter for screening the “at risk” VLBW preterm infants (Ment L. et al., Neurology 2002) in which our pediatric neuroradiologist (Patrick D. Barnes) was involved. “Routine screening cranial US should be done between 7 and 14 days of age with repeat US and MRI before discharge between 36-40 wk” postmenstrual age. Having said that, we want to respond to some of the specific points raised by this letter. 1. We acknowledged in our paper that we did not have weekly US data. On the other hand we compared a single MRI with in most of the cases 3 or more US of each infant. Moreover in one study of predicting CP in VLBW preterm infants with weekly US (including one at term), we were not able to find statistically significant predictive value for US using multiple regression analysis (Maas Y. et al., J.Pediatrics 2000) . About half of infants developing CP have normal US and many infants with abnormal US have normal developmental outcome. A position taken by many investigators and shown in many previous publications (for cited and other references our paper). 2. We believe the issue of myelination raised in the method and again in the discussion is totally misunderstood by Dr. de Vries. We have mentioned that in this study we did not attempt to rank the quality of conventional MRI based on myelination since we had a previously published work addressing this issue more quantitatively. In that paper (Arzoumanian Y. et al., Am. J. Neuroradiology 2003) which unfortunately was not cited by de Vries in their J.Pediatrics 2004 paper, we have shown in 13 infants who developed CP, reduced anisotropy (which is a quantitative measure of myelination and axonal development) in the posterior limb of the internal capsule. 3. We were also surprised on high predictive value of US in the cited study by de Vries in J.Pediatrics 2004. One reason was that only 5% of VLBW preterm infants develop CP, a rate much lower that reported in the literature; probably due to underdiagnosis or loss to followup. Second, 83% of the CP in this group had cyctic PVL. Although we agree with the finding that cyctic PVL if confirmed by MRI usually results in CP, we are surprised that the authors have such a high rate of cystic PVL in their study compared with the literature. This in addition to the lack of sensitivity/specificity of US compared with MRI are also shown in recent studies by Inder TE et al., Am. J. Neuroradiology 2003 and Valkama AM et al., Acta Paediatrica 2000 (see discussion and other references in our paper). 4. If serial weekly US was required for detection of abnormality in VLBW this means 8 to 16 images for each infant. We suggest to replace several of these images with one at term equivalent age MRI to have a more definitive answer.

Majid Mirmiran Patrick D. Barnes Ronald L. Ariagno