Automated Craniofacial Biometry with 3D T2w Fetal MRI
Jacqueline Matthew,Alena Uus,Alexia Egloff,Aysha Luis,Sophie Arulkumaran,Abi Fukami-Gartner,Vanessa Kyriakopoulou,Daniel Cromb,Robert Wright,Kathleen Colford,Maria Deprez,Jana Hutter,Jonathan O'Muircheartaigh,Christina Malamateniou,Reza Razavi,Lisa Story,Joseph V Hajnal,Mary A. Rutherford
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1101/2024.08.13.24311408
2024-08-14
Abstract:Objectives: Craniofacial phenotype-genotype correlations prenatally remain subjective, and detailed evaluation with 3D ultrasound is challenging and time-consuming. Recent methods for automating MRI fetal brain biometry have shown technical feasibility. Using 3D motion-corrected, slice-to-volume reconstructed (SVR) fetal MRI, we developed an automated landmark propagation pipeline specifically for a large set of cranial and facial measurements.
Methods: A literature review and expert consensus identified 31 craniofacial biometrics for fetal MRI. A 3D spatiotemporal SVR fetal MRI atlas was used to define anatomical landmark points and as a template for subject registration, auto-labelling and finally landmark-based biometric calculation. Visual inspections of subject-level landmark labels, as well as multivariate and univariate analyses, were performed in 108 healthy control fetuses and 24 fetuses with Down
syndrome, T21, (gestational age, GA, 29-36 weeks), to assess differences between
groups and identify meaningful landmarks in T21. Reliability and reproducibility were assessed in 10 random datasets by four observers.
Results: Automated labels were produced for all 132 subjects, with a 0.03% major error rate. Significant differences in biometrics were found between T21 and control groups (MANOVA, p<0.001). There were significant differences with large effect sizes for seven measurements (ANOVA, p<0.001), including the anterior base of skull length and maxillary length. Manual measurements took 25-35 minutes per case, while automated extraction took approximately 5 minutes. Bland-Altman plots showed a relative mean bias and limits of agreement within the ranges seen for manual observers except for the mandibular width, which had an agreement threshold for manual observers of good (ICC = 0.904, 95% CI =
0.677-0.975) versus moderate for automated plus manual observers (ICC = 0.635,
95%, CI = 0.176-0.888). Extended GA growth charts (19-39 weeks) based on 280 control fetuses were produced for all craniofacial biometrics and made publicly available for future research.
Conclusion: We present the first automated atlas-based protocol using 3D motion-corrected MRI for fetal craniofacial biometrics and, using this method, accurately characterise differences in craniofacial morphology in Downs syndrome fetuses, with findings consistent with the known phenotype. Future work should include studies to improve measurement reliability, larger clinical cohort studies, technical development of craniofacial optimised MRI sequences and 3D deep learning for anatomical landmarking. Future development may reduce clinical reporting time, improve accuracy, increase understanding of prenatal development and enhance personalised prenatal care with accurate genotype-phenotype
correlations.