Skip to main content
medRxiv
  • Home
  • About
  • Submit
  • ALERTS / RSS
Advanced Search

Towards automated fetal brain biometry reporting for 3-dimensional T2-weighted 0.55-3T magnetic resonance imaging at 20-40 weeks gestational age range

Aysha Luis, Alena Uus, Jacqueline Matthew, Sophie Arulkumaran, Alexia Egloff Collado, Vanessa Kyriakopoulou, Sara Neves Silva, Jordina Aviles Verdera, Megan Hall, Simi Bansal, Sarah McElroy, Kathleen Colford, Joseph V. Hajnal, Jana Hutter, Lisa Story, Mary Rutherford
doi: https://doi.org/10.1101/2025.02.06.25321808
Aysha Luis
1Research Department of Early Life Imaging, School of Biomedical Engineering and Imaging Sciences, King’s College London, London, UK
2Department of Neuroradiology, Barts Health NHS Trust, London, UK
  • Find this author on Google Scholar
  • Find this author on PubMed
  • Search for this author on this site
  • For correspondence: aysha.luis{at}kcl.ac.uk
Alena Uus
1Research Department of Early Life Imaging, School of Biomedical Engineering and Imaging Sciences, King’s College London, London, UK
3Biomedical Computing Department, School of Biomedical Engineering and Imaging Sciences, King’s College London, London, UK
  • Find this author on Google Scholar
  • Find this author on PubMed
  • Search for this author on this site
Jacqueline Matthew
1Research Department of Early Life Imaging, School of Biomedical Engineering and Imaging Sciences, King’s College London, London, UK
3Biomedical Computing Department, School of Biomedical Engineering and Imaging Sciences, King’s College London, London, UK
  • Find this author on Google Scholar
  • Find this author on PubMed
  • Search for this author on this site
Sophie Arulkumaran
1Research Department of Early Life Imaging, School of Biomedical Engineering and Imaging Sciences, King’s College London, London, UK
4Department of Neuroradiology, St George’s University Hospitals NHS Foundation Trust, London, UK
  • Find this author on Google Scholar
  • Find this author on PubMed
  • Search for this author on this site
Alexia Egloff Collado
1Research Department of Early Life Imaging, School of Biomedical Engineering and Imaging Sciences, King’s College London, London, UK
5Department of Neuroradiology, Guy’s and St Thomas’ NHS Foundation Trust, London, UK
  • Find this author on Google Scholar
  • Find this author on PubMed
  • Search for this author on this site
Vanessa Kyriakopoulou
1Research Department of Early Life Imaging, School of Biomedical Engineering and Imaging Sciences, King’s College London, London, UK
  • Find this author on Google Scholar
  • Find this author on PubMed
  • Search for this author on this site
Sara Neves Silva
1Research Department of Early Life Imaging, School of Biomedical Engineering and Imaging Sciences, King’s College London, London, UK
3Biomedical Computing Department, School of Biomedical Engineering and Imaging Sciences, King’s College London, London, UK
  • Find this author on Google Scholar
  • Find this author on PubMed
  • Search for this author on this site
Jordina Aviles Verdera
1Research Department of Early Life Imaging, School of Biomedical Engineering and Imaging Sciences, King’s College London, London, UK
3Biomedical Computing Department, School of Biomedical Engineering and Imaging Sciences, King’s College London, London, UK
  • Find this author on Google Scholar
  • Find this author on PubMed
  • Search for this author on this site
Megan Hall
1Research Department of Early Life Imaging, School of Biomedical Engineering and Imaging Sciences, King’s College London, London, UK
6Department of Women and Children’s Health, King’s College London, London, UK
  • Find this author on Google Scholar
  • Find this author on PubMed
  • Search for this author on this site
Simi Bansal
1Research Department of Early Life Imaging, School of Biomedical Engineering and Imaging Sciences, King’s College London, London, UK
6Department of Women and Children’s Health, King’s College London, London, UK
  • Find this author on Google Scholar
  • Find this author on PubMed
  • Search for this author on this site
Sarah McElroy
1Research Department of Early Life Imaging, School of Biomedical Engineering and Imaging Sciences, King’s College London, London, UK
7MR Research Collaborations, Siemens Healthcare Limited, Camberley, UK
  • Find this author on Google Scholar
  • Find this author on PubMed
  • Search for this author on this site
Kathleen Colford
1Research Department of Early Life Imaging, School of Biomedical Engineering and Imaging Sciences, King’s College London, London, UK
  • Find this author on Google Scholar
  • Find this author on PubMed
  • Search for this author on this site
Joseph V. Hajnal
1Research Department of Early Life Imaging, School of Biomedical Engineering and Imaging Sciences, King’s College London, London, UK
8Research Department of Imaging Physics and Engineering, School of Biomedical Engineering and Imaging Sciences, King’s College London, London, UK
  • Find this author on Google Scholar
  • Find this author on PubMed
  • Search for this author on this site
Jana Hutter
1Research Department of Early Life Imaging, School of Biomedical Engineering and Imaging Sciences, King’s College London, London, UK
3Biomedical Computing Department, School of Biomedical Engineering and Imaging Sciences, King’s College London, London, UK
9Smart Imaging Lab, Radiological Institute, University Hospital Erlangen, Erlangen, Germany
  • Find this author on Google Scholar
  • Find this author on PubMed
  • Search for this author on this site
Lisa Story
1Research Department of Early Life Imaging, School of Biomedical Engineering and Imaging Sciences, King’s College London, London, UK
6Department of Women and Children’s Health, King’s College London, London, UK
10Fetal Medicine Unit, Guy’s and St Thomas’ NHS Foundation Trust, London, UK
  • Find this author on Google Scholar
  • Find this author on PubMed
  • Search for this author on this site
Mary Rutherford
1Research Department of Early Life Imaging, School of Biomedical Engineering and Imaging Sciences, King’s College London, London, UK
  • Find this author on Google Scholar
  • Find this author on PubMed
  • Search for this author on this site
  • Abstract
  • Full Text
  • Info/History
  • Metrics
  • Data/Code
  • Preview PDF
Loading

Abstract

Background The detailed assessment of fetal brain maturation and development involves morphological evaluation, gyration analysis, and reliable biometric measurements. Manual measurements on conventional 2-D magnetic resonance imaging (MRI) are affected by fetal motion and there is no clear consensus regarding definitions for brain biometric parameters and anatomical landmark placements, making consistent reference plane and slice selection challenging. Automated biometry with 3-D slice-to-volume reconstruction (SVR) has the potential to improve the reliability of derived measurements, allowing precise quantification of fetal brain development. Previous published works have primarily focused on the technical feasibility of automated fetal brain biometry methods for T2-weighted (T2W) MRI. However, none have proposed solutions for automating the reporting of biometry results, which could enhance clinical utility and support real-time integration into routine clinical workflows. Furthermore, there is no consensus on a universal fetal biometry protocol for 3D fetal MRI.

Aim To formalise biometry protocol for 3-D SVR T2W fetal brain MRI and to develop and validate a fully automated biometry reporting pipeline.

Materials and methods Automated extraction of 13 routinely reported linear fetal biometry measurements using deep learning localisation of anatomical landmarks in 3-D reconstructed T2W brain images and presentation of the results in .html report with centile calculation. The automated biometry method was tested on 90 retrospective cases and the fully automated, end-to-end biometry reporting pipeline was prospectively evaluated on 111 cases across a wide range of gestational ages, field strengths and scanning parameters. We also generated normal centile ranges for 19 - 40 weaks GA range from 406 normal control datasets.

Results The retrospective evaluation showed excellent to good localisation for the majority of cases, with the maximum absolute difference between automated vs. manual measurement within 1-3mm range. For the prospective evaluation, more than 98% of all landmark placement were graded as acceptable for interpretation and measurements. The processing time of the pipeline was less than five minutes per case, with the measurements and centiles available at the time of reporting. Inspection of the automated landmark placement and computed biometrics took 1-3 minutes per case. The generated normative growth charts demonstrate high correlation with the trends in the previously reported works.

Conclusion Our approach is the first to develop a pipeline which integrates automated fetal brain biometric measurements, centile calculations and normative growth charts into the clinical workflow, allowing fully automated biometry reporting for T2-weighted motion-corrected SVR MRI.

Competing Interest Statement

The authors have declared no competing interest.

Funding Statement

This work was supported by the MRC grant MR/X010007/1, the NIHR Advanced Fellowship to L.S. NIHR3016640, the Wellcome Trust, Sir Henry Wellcome Fellowship to J.H. 201374/Z/16/Z, the UKRI FLF to J.H. MR/T018119/1, DFG Heisenberg 502024488 the High Tech Agenda Bavaria to J.H., the MRC grant MR/W019469/1, the Wellcome/EPSRC Centre WT203148/Z/16/Z, the NIHR Clinical Research Facility (CRF) at Guys and St Thomas and by the National Institute for Health Research Biomedical Research Centre based at Guys and St Thomas NHS Foundation Trust and Kings College London.

Author Declarations

I confirm all relevant ethical guidelines have been followed, and any necessary IRB and/or ethics committee approvals have been obtained.

Yes

The details of the IRB/oversight body that provided approval or exemption for the research described are given below:

The following relevant datasets were given research ethics committee (REC) approval by the Health Research Authority: "Placental Imaging Project" (REC 16/LO/1573), "Individualised Risk prediction of adverse neonatal outcome in pregnancies that deliver preterm using advanced MRI techniques and machine learning" (REC 21/SS/0082), "CARP" (REC 19/LO/0852), "MEERKAT" (REC 21/LO/0742), "MiBirth" (REC 23/LO/0685), "NANO" (REC 22/YH/0210), and "Quantification of fetal growth and development with MRI" (REC 07/H0707/105). All studies were performed in accordance with relevant ethical guidelines and regulations. Informed written consent was obtained from all participants.

I confirm that all necessary patient/participant consent has been obtained and the appropriate institutional forms have been archived, and that any patient/participant/sample identifiers included were not known to anyone (e.g., hospital staff, patients or participants themselves) outside the research group so cannot be used to identify individuals.

Yes

I understand that all clinical trials and any other prospective interventional studies must be registered with an ICMJE-approved registry, such as ClinicalTrials.gov. I confirm that any such study reported in the manuscript has been registered and the trial registration ID is provided (note: if posting a prospective study registered retrospectively, please provide a statement in the trial ID field explaining why the study was not registered in advance).

Yes

I have followed all appropriate research reporting guidelines, such as any relevant EQUATOR Network research reporting checklist(s) and other pertinent material, if applicable.

Yes

Footnotes

  • Contributing authors: alena.uus{at}kcl.ac.uk;

Data availability

The individual fetal MRI datasets used for this study are not publicly available due to ethics regulations. For more information please contact Jana Hutter jana.hutter{at}kcl.ac.uk.

Copyright 
The copyright holder for this preprint is the author/funder, who has granted medRxiv a license to display the preprint in perpetuity. It is made available under a CC-BY 4.0 International license.
Back to top
PreviousNext
Posted February 10, 2025.
Download PDF
Data/Code
Email

Thank you for your interest in spreading the word about medRxiv.

NOTE: Your email address is requested solely to identify you as the sender of this article.

Enter multiple addresses on separate lines or separate them with commas.
Towards automated fetal brain biometry reporting for 3-dimensional T2-weighted 0.55-3T magnetic resonance imaging at 20-40 weeks gestational age range
(Your Name) has forwarded a page to you from medRxiv
(Your Name) thought you would like to see this page from the medRxiv website.
CAPTCHA
This question is for testing whether or not you are a human visitor and to prevent automated spam submissions.
Share
Towards automated fetal brain biometry reporting for 3-dimensional T2-weighted 0.55-3T magnetic resonance imaging at 20-40 weeks gestational age range
Aysha Luis, Alena Uus, Jacqueline Matthew, Sophie Arulkumaran, Alexia Egloff Collado, Vanessa Kyriakopoulou, Sara Neves Silva, Jordina Aviles Verdera, Megan Hall, Simi Bansal, Sarah McElroy, Kathleen Colford, Joseph V. Hajnal, Jana Hutter, Lisa Story, Mary Rutherford
medRxiv 2025.02.06.25321808; doi: https://doi.org/10.1101/2025.02.06.25321808
Twitter logo Facebook logo LinkedIn logo Mendeley logo
Citation Tools
Towards automated fetal brain biometry reporting for 3-dimensional T2-weighted 0.55-3T magnetic resonance imaging at 20-40 weeks gestational age range
Aysha Luis, Alena Uus, Jacqueline Matthew, Sophie Arulkumaran, Alexia Egloff Collado, Vanessa Kyriakopoulou, Sara Neves Silva, Jordina Aviles Verdera, Megan Hall, Simi Bansal, Sarah McElroy, Kathleen Colford, Joseph V. Hajnal, Jana Hutter, Lisa Story, Mary Rutherford
medRxiv 2025.02.06.25321808; doi: https://doi.org/10.1101/2025.02.06.25321808

Citation Manager Formats

  • BibTeX
  • Bookends
  • EasyBib
  • EndNote (tagged)
  • EndNote 8 (xml)
  • Medlars
  • Mendeley
  • Papers
  • RefWorks Tagged
  • Ref Manager
  • RIS
  • Zotero
  • Tweet Widget
  • Facebook Like
  • Google Plus One

Subject Area

  • Radiology and Imaging
Subject Areas
All Articles
  • Addiction Medicine (576)
  • Allergy and Immunology (868)
  • Anesthesia (306)
  • Cardiovascular Medicine (4483)
  • Dentistry and Oral Medicine (449)
  • Dermatology (385)
  • Emergency Medicine (615)
  • Endocrinology (including Diabetes Mellitus and Metabolic Disease) (1528)
  • Epidemiology (15282)
  • Forensic Medicine (31)
  • Gastroenterology (1134)
  • Genetic and Genomic Medicine (6650)
  • Geriatric Medicine (671)
  • Health Economics (1006)
  • Health Informatics (4606)
  • Health Policy (1378)
  • Health Systems and Quality Improvement (1624)
  • Hematology (544)
  • HIV/AIDS (1276)
  • Infectious Diseases (except HIV/AIDS) (15965)
  • Intensive Care and Critical Care Medicine (1111)
  • Medical Education (626)
  • Medical Ethics (147)
  • Nephrology (674)
  • Neurology (6698)
  • Nursing (346)
  • Nutrition (1006)
  • Obstetrics and Gynecology (1153)
  • Occupational and Environmental Health (961)
  • Oncology (3370)
  • Ophthalmology (988)
  • Orthopedics (370)
  • Otolaryngology (421)
  • Pain Medicine (437)
  • Palliative Medicine (131)
  • Pathology (670)
  • Pediatrics (1704)
  • Pharmacology and Therapeutics (700)
  • Primary Care Research (717)
  • Psychiatry and Clinical Psychology (5497)
  • Public and Global Health (9287)
  • Radiology and Imaging (2225)
  • Rehabilitation Medicine and Physical Therapy (1375)
  • Respiratory Medicine (1202)
  • Rheumatology (598)
  • Sexual and Reproductive Health (721)
  • Sports Medicine (536)
  • Surgery (722)
  • Toxicology (100)
  • Transplantation (290)
  • Urology (267)