Prevalence of and risk factors for failure of fetal magnetic resonance imaging due to maternal claustrophobia or malaise
ABSTRACT Objective To evaluate the prevalence of and risk factors for failure of fetal magnetic resonance imaging (MRI) due to maternal claustrophobia or malaise. Methods This retrospective cohort study included pregnant women who underwent fetal MRI for clinical indications or research purposes bet...
Gespeichert in:
| Veröffentlicht in: | Ultrasound in obstetrics & gynecology 2023-03, Vol.61 (3), p.392-398 |
|---|---|
| Hauptverfasser: | , , , , , |
| Format: | Artikel |
| Sprache: | eng |
| Schlagworte: | |
| Online-Zugang: | Volltext |
| Tags: |
Tag hinzufügen
Keine Tags, Fügen Sie den ersten Tag hinzu!
|
| container_end_page | 398 |
|---|---|
| container_issue | 3 |
| container_start_page | 392 |
| container_title | Ultrasound in obstetrics & gynecology |
| container_volume | 61 |
| creator | Dütemeyer, V. Cannie, M. M. Badr, D. A. Kadji, C. Carlin, A. Jani, J. C. |
| description | ABSTRACT
Objective
To evaluate the prevalence of and risk factors for failure of fetal magnetic resonance imaging (MRI) due to maternal claustrophobia or malaise.
Methods
This retrospective cohort study included pregnant women who underwent fetal MRI for clinical indications or research purposes between January 2012 and December 2019 at a single center. One group included patients who completed the entire examination and the other group inlcuded patients who interrupted their MRI examination due to claustrophobia/malaise. We estimated the rate of MRI failure due to maternal claustrophobia/malaise and compared maternal and clinical variables between the two groups. Multiple logistic regression analysis was performed to identify independent risk factors for claustrophobia/malaise during MRI examination in pregnancy.
Results
Among 3413 patients who agreed to undergo fetal MRI, the prevalence of failure because of claustrophobia or malaise was 2.1%. The rate of claustrophobia/malaise in patients who underwent MRI for a clinical indication was lower compared to that in patients who underwent MRI for research purposes only (0.6% (4/696) vs 2.4% (65/2678); P = 0.003). Fetal MRI performed for research purposes only (adjusted odds ratio (aOR), 0.05 (95% CI, 0.01–0.48); P = 0.003), higher maternal age (aOR, 1.07 (95% CI, 1.02–1.12); P = 0.003) and later gestational age at the time of fetal MRI (aOR, 1.46 (95% CI, 1.16–2.04); P = 0.008) were independent risk factors for claustrophobia/malaise. Shorter fetal MRI duration (aOR, 0.77 (95% CI, 0.63–0.88); P = 0.001) was also associated with claustrophobia/malaise during the procedure. Body mass index, ethnic origin, multiple pregnancy, being parous and size of the magnetic bore were not associated with MRI failure due to claustrophobia/malaise.
Conclusion
The rate of fetal MRI failure due to claustrophobia or malaise was found to be low, particularly when the examination was performed for a clinical indication, and should not be considered a common problem in the pregnant population. © 2022 International Society of Ultrasound in Obstetrics and Gynecology. |
| doi_str_mv | 10.1002/uog.26045 |
| format | Article |
| fullrecord | <record><control><sourceid>proquest_cross</sourceid><recordid>TN_cdi_proquest_miscellaneous_2775620864</recordid><sourceformat>XML</sourceformat><sourcesystem>PC</sourcesystem><sourcerecordid>2780678937</sourcerecordid><originalsourceid>FETCH-LOGICAL-c2835-ecf225e7e696b7dc6f10293fd70d82451195bbf1b850b7433edad23271812713</originalsourceid><addsrcrecordid>eNp1kcFO3DAQhq2Kqrtse-gLIEtc4BAY24mdHCtUoBISHJZz5DjjrRdvvLWTtrx9vezCAakX25r5_EkzPyFfGVwwAH45hdUFl1BWH8iclbIpQEF1RObQSCiUbPiMHKe0BgBZCvmJzIRUSgjgc_L3IeJv7XEwSIOleuhpdOmJWm3GEBO1Iea381N86VsctacbvRpwdIZGTGHQu78u19ywov2EdAyZGDEOGTVeT2mMYfszdE7TbNtor13Cz-Sj1T7hl8O9IMvr78ur2-Lu_ubH1be7wvBaVAUay3mFCmUjO9UbaRnwRtheQV_zsmKsqbrOsq6uoFOlENjrnguuWM3yIRbkbK_dxvBrwjS2G5cMeq8HDFNquVKV5FDnxSzI6Tt0HabdEDuqBqnqRqhMne8pE0NKEW27jXn4-NwyaHdptDmN9iWNzJ4cjFO3wf6NfF1_Bi73wB_n8fn_pvbx_mav_AfWJpQN</addsrcrecordid><sourcetype>Aggregation Database</sourcetype><iscdi>true</iscdi><recordtype>article</recordtype><pqid>2780678937</pqid></control><display><type>article</type><title>Prevalence of and risk factors for failure of fetal magnetic resonance imaging due to maternal claustrophobia or malaise</title><source>Wiley Free Content</source><source>MEDLINE</source><source>Wiley Online Library Journals Frontfile Complete</source><source>Elektronische Zeitschriftenbibliothek - Frei zugängliche E-Journals</source><creator>Dütemeyer, V. ; Cannie, M. M. ; Badr, D. A. ; Kadji, C. ; Carlin, A. ; Jani, J. C.</creator><creatorcontrib>Dütemeyer, V. ; Cannie, M. M. ; Badr, D. A. ; Kadji, C. ; Carlin, A. ; Jani, J. C.</creatorcontrib><description>ABSTRACT
Objective
To evaluate the prevalence of and risk factors for failure of fetal magnetic resonance imaging (MRI) due to maternal claustrophobia or malaise.
Methods
This retrospective cohort study included pregnant women who underwent fetal MRI for clinical indications or research purposes between January 2012 and December 2019 at a single center. One group included patients who completed the entire examination and the other group inlcuded patients who interrupted their MRI examination due to claustrophobia/malaise. We estimated the rate of MRI failure due to maternal claustrophobia/malaise and compared maternal and clinical variables between the two groups. Multiple logistic regression analysis was performed to identify independent risk factors for claustrophobia/malaise during MRI examination in pregnancy.
Results
Among 3413 patients who agreed to undergo fetal MRI, the prevalence of failure because of claustrophobia or malaise was 2.1%. The rate of claustrophobia/malaise in patients who underwent MRI for a clinical indication was lower compared to that in patients who underwent MRI for research purposes only (0.6% (4/696) vs 2.4% (65/2678); P = 0.003). Fetal MRI performed for research purposes only (adjusted odds ratio (aOR), 0.05 (95% CI, 0.01–0.48); P = 0.003), higher maternal age (aOR, 1.07 (95% CI, 1.02–1.12); P = 0.003) and later gestational age at the time of fetal MRI (aOR, 1.46 (95% CI, 1.16–2.04); P = 0.008) were independent risk factors for claustrophobia/malaise. Shorter fetal MRI duration (aOR, 0.77 (95% CI, 0.63–0.88); P = 0.001) was also associated with claustrophobia/malaise during the procedure. Body mass index, ethnic origin, multiple pregnancy, being parous and size of the magnetic bore were not associated with MRI failure due to claustrophobia/malaise.
Conclusion
The rate of fetal MRI failure due to claustrophobia or malaise was found to be low, particularly when the examination was performed for a clinical indication, and should not be considered a common problem in the pregnant population. © 2022 International Society of Ultrasound in Obstetrics and Gynecology.</description><identifier>ISSN: 0960-7692</identifier><identifier>EISSN: 1469-0705</identifier><identifier>DOI: 10.1002/uog.26045</identifier><identifier>PMID: 36773302</identifier><language>eng</language><publisher>Chichester, UK: John Wiley & Sons, Ltd</publisher><subject>Body mass ; Body mass index ; Body size ; claustrophobia ; Failure ; Female ; fetal MRI ; Fetuses ; Gestational age ; Gynecology ; Humans ; Indication ; Magnetic resonance imaging ; Magnetic Resonance Imaging - methods ; malaise ; Medical imaging ; Obstetrics ; Phobic Disorders - complications ; Phobic Disorders - epidemiology ; Pregnancy ; Prevalence ; Regression analysis ; Retrospective Studies ; Risk Factors</subject><ispartof>Ultrasound in obstetrics & gynecology, 2023-03, Vol.61 (3), p.392-398</ispartof><rights>2022 International Society of Ultrasound in Obstetrics and Gynecology.</rights><rights>Copyright © 2023 ISUOG. Published by John Wiley & Sons Ltd</rights><lds50>peer_reviewed</lds50><woscitedreferencessubscribed>false</woscitedreferencessubscribed><citedby>FETCH-LOGICAL-c2835-ecf225e7e696b7dc6f10293fd70d82451195bbf1b850b7433edad23271812713</citedby><cites>FETCH-LOGICAL-c2835-ecf225e7e696b7dc6f10293fd70d82451195bbf1b850b7433edad23271812713</cites><orcidid>0000-0003-2252-342X</orcidid></display><links><openurl>$$Topenurl_article</openurl><openurlfulltext>$$Topenurlfull_article</openurlfulltext><thumbnail>$$Tsyndetics_thumb_exl</thumbnail><linktopdf>$$Uhttps://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/pdf/10.1002%2Fuog.26045$$EPDF$$P50$$Gwiley$$H</linktopdf><linktohtml>$$Uhttps://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/full/10.1002%2Fuog.26045$$EHTML$$P50$$Gwiley$$H</linktohtml><link.rule.ids>314,776,780,1411,1427,27901,27902,45550,45551,46384,46808</link.rule.ids><backlink>$$Uhttps://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/36773302$$D View this record in MEDLINE/PubMed$$Hfree_for_read</backlink></links><search><creatorcontrib>Dütemeyer, V.</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Cannie, M. M.</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Badr, D. A.</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Kadji, C.</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Carlin, A.</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Jani, J. C.</creatorcontrib><title>Prevalence of and risk factors for failure of fetal magnetic resonance imaging due to maternal claustrophobia or malaise</title><title>Ultrasound in obstetrics & gynecology</title><addtitle>Ultrasound Obstet Gynecol</addtitle><description>ABSTRACT
Objective
To evaluate the prevalence of and risk factors for failure of fetal magnetic resonance imaging (MRI) due to maternal claustrophobia or malaise.
Methods
This retrospective cohort study included pregnant women who underwent fetal MRI for clinical indications or research purposes between January 2012 and December 2019 at a single center. One group included patients who completed the entire examination and the other group inlcuded patients who interrupted their MRI examination due to claustrophobia/malaise. We estimated the rate of MRI failure due to maternal claustrophobia/malaise and compared maternal and clinical variables between the two groups. Multiple logistic regression analysis was performed to identify independent risk factors for claustrophobia/malaise during MRI examination in pregnancy.
Results
Among 3413 patients who agreed to undergo fetal MRI, the prevalence of failure because of claustrophobia or malaise was 2.1%. The rate of claustrophobia/malaise in patients who underwent MRI for a clinical indication was lower compared to that in patients who underwent MRI for research purposes only (0.6% (4/696) vs 2.4% (65/2678); P = 0.003). Fetal MRI performed for research purposes only (adjusted odds ratio (aOR), 0.05 (95% CI, 0.01–0.48); P = 0.003), higher maternal age (aOR, 1.07 (95% CI, 1.02–1.12); P = 0.003) and later gestational age at the time of fetal MRI (aOR, 1.46 (95% CI, 1.16–2.04); P = 0.008) were independent risk factors for claustrophobia/malaise. Shorter fetal MRI duration (aOR, 0.77 (95% CI, 0.63–0.88); P = 0.001) was also associated with claustrophobia/malaise during the procedure. Body mass index, ethnic origin, multiple pregnancy, being parous and size of the magnetic bore were not associated with MRI failure due to claustrophobia/malaise.
Conclusion
The rate of fetal MRI failure due to claustrophobia or malaise was found to be low, particularly when the examination was performed for a clinical indication, and should not be considered a common problem in the pregnant population. © 2022 International Society of Ultrasound in Obstetrics and Gynecology.</description><subject>Body mass</subject><subject>Body mass index</subject><subject>Body size</subject><subject>claustrophobia</subject><subject>Failure</subject><subject>Female</subject><subject>fetal MRI</subject><subject>Fetuses</subject><subject>Gestational age</subject><subject>Gynecology</subject><subject>Humans</subject><subject>Indication</subject><subject>Magnetic resonance imaging</subject><subject>Magnetic Resonance Imaging - methods</subject><subject>malaise</subject><subject>Medical imaging</subject><subject>Obstetrics</subject><subject>Phobic Disorders - complications</subject><subject>Phobic Disorders - epidemiology</subject><subject>Pregnancy</subject><subject>Prevalence</subject><subject>Regression analysis</subject><subject>Retrospective Studies</subject><subject>Risk Factors</subject><issn>0960-7692</issn><issn>1469-0705</issn><fulltext>true</fulltext><rsrctype>article</rsrctype><creationdate>2023</creationdate><recordtype>article</recordtype><sourceid>EIF</sourceid><recordid>eNp1kcFO3DAQhq2Kqrtse-gLIEtc4BAY24mdHCtUoBISHJZz5DjjrRdvvLWTtrx9vezCAakX25r5_EkzPyFfGVwwAH45hdUFl1BWH8iclbIpQEF1RObQSCiUbPiMHKe0BgBZCvmJzIRUSgjgc_L3IeJv7XEwSIOleuhpdOmJWm3GEBO1Iea381N86VsctacbvRpwdIZGTGHQu78u19ywov2EdAyZGDEOGTVeT2mMYfszdE7TbNtor13Cz-Sj1T7hl8O9IMvr78ur2-Lu_ubH1be7wvBaVAUay3mFCmUjO9UbaRnwRtheQV_zsmKsqbrOsq6uoFOlENjrnguuWM3yIRbkbK_dxvBrwjS2G5cMeq8HDFNquVKV5FDnxSzI6Tt0HabdEDuqBqnqRqhMne8pE0NKEW27jXn4-NwyaHdptDmN9iWNzJ4cjFO3wf6NfF1_Bi73wB_n8fn_pvbx_mav_AfWJpQN</recordid><startdate>202303</startdate><enddate>202303</enddate><creator>Dütemeyer, V.</creator><creator>Cannie, M. M.</creator><creator>Badr, D. A.</creator><creator>Kadji, C.</creator><creator>Carlin, A.</creator><creator>Jani, J. C.</creator><general>John Wiley & Sons, Ltd</general><general>Wiley Subscription Services, Inc</general><scope>CGR</scope><scope>CUY</scope><scope>CVF</scope><scope>ECM</scope><scope>EIF</scope><scope>NPM</scope><scope>AAYXX</scope><scope>CITATION</scope><scope>7QO</scope><scope>8FD</scope><scope>FR3</scope><scope>K9.</scope><scope>P64</scope><scope>7X8</scope><orcidid>https://orcid.org/0000-0003-2252-342X</orcidid></search><sort><creationdate>202303</creationdate><title>Prevalence of and risk factors for failure of fetal magnetic resonance imaging due to maternal claustrophobia or malaise</title><author>Dütemeyer, V. ; Cannie, M. M. ; Badr, D. A. ; Kadji, C. ; Carlin, A. ; Jani, J. C.</author></sort><facets><frbrtype>5</frbrtype><frbrgroupid>cdi_FETCH-LOGICAL-c2835-ecf225e7e696b7dc6f10293fd70d82451195bbf1b850b7433edad23271812713</frbrgroupid><rsrctype>articles</rsrctype><prefilter>articles</prefilter><language>eng</language><creationdate>2023</creationdate><topic>Body mass</topic><topic>Body mass index</topic><topic>Body size</topic><topic>claustrophobia</topic><topic>Failure</topic><topic>Female</topic><topic>fetal MRI</topic><topic>Fetuses</topic><topic>Gestational age</topic><topic>Gynecology</topic><topic>Humans</topic><topic>Indication</topic><topic>Magnetic resonance imaging</topic><topic>Magnetic Resonance Imaging - methods</topic><topic>malaise</topic><topic>Medical imaging</topic><topic>Obstetrics</topic><topic>Phobic Disorders - complications</topic><topic>Phobic Disorders - epidemiology</topic><topic>Pregnancy</topic><topic>Prevalence</topic><topic>Regression analysis</topic><topic>Retrospective Studies</topic><topic>Risk Factors</topic><toplevel>peer_reviewed</toplevel><toplevel>online_resources</toplevel><creatorcontrib>Dütemeyer, V.</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Cannie, M. M.</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Badr, D. A.</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Kadji, C.</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Carlin, A.</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Jani, J. C.</creatorcontrib><collection>Medline</collection><collection>MEDLINE</collection><collection>MEDLINE (Ovid)</collection><collection>MEDLINE</collection><collection>MEDLINE</collection><collection>PubMed</collection><collection>CrossRef</collection><collection>Biotechnology Research Abstracts</collection><collection>Technology Research Database</collection><collection>Engineering Research Database</collection><collection>ProQuest Health & Medical Complete (Alumni)</collection><collection>Biotechnology and BioEngineering Abstracts</collection><collection>MEDLINE - Academic</collection><jtitle>Ultrasound in obstetrics & gynecology</jtitle></facets><delivery><delcategory>Remote Search Resource</delcategory><fulltext>fulltext</fulltext></delivery><addata><au>Dütemeyer, V.</au><au>Cannie, M. M.</au><au>Badr, D. A.</au><au>Kadji, C.</au><au>Carlin, A.</au><au>Jani, J. C.</au><format>journal</format><genre>article</genre><ristype>JOUR</ristype><atitle>Prevalence of and risk factors for failure of fetal magnetic resonance imaging due to maternal claustrophobia or malaise</atitle><jtitle>Ultrasound in obstetrics & gynecology</jtitle><addtitle>Ultrasound Obstet Gynecol</addtitle><date>2023-03</date><risdate>2023</risdate><volume>61</volume><issue>3</issue><spage>392</spage><epage>398</epage><pages>392-398</pages><issn>0960-7692</issn><eissn>1469-0705</eissn><abstract>ABSTRACT
Objective
To evaluate the prevalence of and risk factors for failure of fetal magnetic resonance imaging (MRI) due to maternal claustrophobia or malaise.
Methods
This retrospective cohort study included pregnant women who underwent fetal MRI for clinical indications or research purposes between January 2012 and December 2019 at a single center. One group included patients who completed the entire examination and the other group inlcuded patients who interrupted their MRI examination due to claustrophobia/malaise. We estimated the rate of MRI failure due to maternal claustrophobia/malaise and compared maternal and clinical variables between the two groups. Multiple logistic regression analysis was performed to identify independent risk factors for claustrophobia/malaise during MRI examination in pregnancy.
Results
Among 3413 patients who agreed to undergo fetal MRI, the prevalence of failure because of claustrophobia or malaise was 2.1%. The rate of claustrophobia/malaise in patients who underwent MRI for a clinical indication was lower compared to that in patients who underwent MRI for research purposes only (0.6% (4/696) vs 2.4% (65/2678); P = 0.003). Fetal MRI performed for research purposes only (adjusted odds ratio (aOR), 0.05 (95% CI, 0.01–0.48); P = 0.003), higher maternal age (aOR, 1.07 (95% CI, 1.02–1.12); P = 0.003) and later gestational age at the time of fetal MRI (aOR, 1.46 (95% CI, 1.16–2.04); P = 0.008) were independent risk factors for claustrophobia/malaise. Shorter fetal MRI duration (aOR, 0.77 (95% CI, 0.63–0.88); P = 0.001) was also associated with claustrophobia/malaise during the procedure. Body mass index, ethnic origin, multiple pregnancy, being parous and size of the magnetic bore were not associated with MRI failure due to claustrophobia/malaise.
Conclusion
The rate of fetal MRI failure due to claustrophobia or malaise was found to be low, particularly when the examination was performed for a clinical indication, and should not be considered a common problem in the pregnant population. © 2022 International Society of Ultrasound in Obstetrics and Gynecology.</abstract><cop>Chichester, UK</cop><pub>John Wiley & Sons, Ltd</pub><pmid>36773302</pmid><doi>10.1002/uog.26045</doi><tpages>7</tpages><orcidid>https://orcid.org/0000-0003-2252-342X</orcidid></addata></record> |
| fulltext | fulltext |
| identifier | ISSN: 0960-7692 |
| ispartof | Ultrasound in obstetrics & gynecology, 2023-03, Vol.61 (3), p.392-398 |
| issn | 0960-7692 1469-0705 |
| language | eng |
| recordid | cdi_proquest_miscellaneous_2775620864 |
| source | Wiley Free Content; MEDLINE; Wiley Online Library Journals Frontfile Complete; Elektronische Zeitschriftenbibliothek - Frei zugängliche E-Journals |
| subjects | Body mass Body mass index Body size claustrophobia Failure Female fetal MRI Fetuses Gestational age Gynecology Humans Indication Magnetic resonance imaging Magnetic Resonance Imaging - methods malaise Medical imaging Obstetrics Phobic Disorders - complications Phobic Disorders - epidemiology Pregnancy Prevalence Regression analysis Retrospective Studies Risk Factors |
| title | Prevalence of and risk factors for failure of fetal magnetic resonance imaging due to maternal claustrophobia or malaise |
| url | https://sfx.bib-bvb.de/sfx_tum?ctx_ver=Z39.88-2004&ctx_enc=info:ofi/enc:UTF-8&ctx_tim=2025-02-09T23%3A23%3A31IST&url_ver=Z39.88-2004&url_ctx_fmt=infofi/fmt:kev:mtx:ctx&rfr_id=info:sid/primo.exlibrisgroup.com:primo3-Article-proquest_cross&rft_val_fmt=info:ofi/fmt:kev:mtx:journal&rft.genre=article&rft.atitle=Prevalence%20of%20and%20risk%20factors%20for%20failure%20of%20fetal%20magnetic%20resonance%20imaging%20due%20to%20maternal%20claustrophobia%20or%20malaise&rft.jtitle=Ultrasound%20in%20obstetrics%20&%20gynecology&rft.au=D%C3%BCtemeyer,%20V.&rft.date=2023-03&rft.volume=61&rft.issue=3&rft.spage=392&rft.epage=398&rft.pages=392-398&rft.issn=0960-7692&rft.eissn=1469-0705&rft_id=info:doi/10.1002/uog.26045&rft_dat=%3Cproquest_cross%3E2780678937%3C/proquest_cross%3E%3Curl%3E%3C/url%3E&disable_directlink=true&sfx.directlink=off&sfx.report_link=0&rft_id=info:oai/&rft_pqid=2780678937&rft_id=info:pmid/36773302&rfr_iscdi=true |