Diagnostic ultrasound ( PDFDrive )

CHAPTER 28 Overview of Obstetric Imaging 1033
28. Shirley IM, Bottomley F, Robinson VP. Routine radiographer screening for
fetal abnormalities by ultrasound in an unselected low risk population. Br
J Radiol. 1992;65(775):564-569.
29. Luck CA. Value of routine ultrasound scanning at 19 weeks: a four year
study of 8849 deliveries. BMJ. 1992;304(6840):1474-1478.
30. Chitty LS, Hunt GH, Moore J, Lobb MO. Efectiveness of routine ultrasonography
in detecting fetal structural abnormalities in a low risk population.
BMJ. 1991;303(6811):1165-1169.
31. Levi S, Montenegro NA. Eurofetus: an evaluation of routine ultrasound
screening for the detection of fetal defects. Aims and method. Ann N Y
Acad Sci. 1998;847:103-117.
32. Fadda GM, Capobianco G, Balata A, et al. Routine second trimester ultrasound
screening for prenatal detection of fetal malformations in Sassari University
Hospital, Italy: 23 years of experience in 42,256 pregnancies. Eur J Obstet
Gynecol Reprod Biol. 2009;144(2):110-114.
33. Grandjean H, Larroque D, Levi S. he performance of routine ultrasonographic
screening of pregnancies in the Eurofetus Study. Am J Obstet Gynecol.
1999;181(2):446-454.
34. Crane JP, LeFevre ML, Winborn RC, et al. A randomized trial of prenatal
ultrasonographic screening: impact on the detection, management, and
outcome of anomalous fetuses. he RADIUS Study Group. Am J Obstet
Gynecol. 1994;171(2):392-399.
35. Berwick DM, Weinstein MC. What do patients value? Willingness to pay
for ultrasound in normal pregnancy. Med Care. 1985;23(7):881-893.
36. Johnson DD, Pretorius DH, Budorick NE, et al. Fetal lip and primary palate:
three-dimensional versus two-dimensional US. Radiology. 2000;217(1):
236-239.
37. Dyson RL, Pretorius DH, Budorick NE, et al. hree-dimensional ultrasound
in the evaluation of fetal anomalies. Ultrasound Obstet Gynecol.
2000;16(4):321-328.
38. Bega G, Lev-Toaf A, Kuhlman K, et al. hree-dimensional multiplanar
transvaginal ultrasound of the cervix in pregnancy. Ultrasound Obstet Gynecol.
2000;16(4):351-358.
39. Gerards FA, Engels MA, Twisk JW, van Vugt JM. Normal fetal lung volume
measured with three-dimensional ultrasound. Ultrasound Obstet Gynecol.
2006;27(2):134-144.
40. Jani J, Cannie M, Sonigo P, et al. Value of prenatal magnetic resonance imaging
in the prediction of postnatal outcome in fetuses with diaphragmatic hernia.
Ultrasound Obstet Gynecol. 2008;32(6):793-799.
41. Zalel Y, Yagel S, Achiron R, et al. hree-dimensional ultrasonography of the
fetal vermis at 18 to 26 weeks’ gestation: time of appearance of the primary
issure. J Ultrasound Med. 2009;28(1):1-8.
42. U.S. Food and Drug Administration. Fetal keepsake videos. Washington
DC. Updated 2015. Available from: www.fda.gov/MedicalDevices/Safety/
AlertsandNotices/PatientAlerts/ucm064756.htm. Accessed 1 July 2017.
43. Wolf S, Crooks LE, Brown P, et al. Tests for DNA and chromosomal damage
induced by nuclear magnetic resonance imaging. Radiology. 1980;136(3):
707-710.
44. Kanal E, Gillen J, Evans JA, et al. Survey of reproductive health among female
MR workers. Radiology. 1993;187(2):395-399.
45. Baker PN, Johnson IR, Harvey PR, et al. A three-year follow-up of children
imaged in utero with echo-planar magnetic resonance. Am J Obstet Gynecol.
1994;170(1 Pt 1):32-33.
46. Chew S, Ahmadi A, Goh PS, Foong LC. he efects of 1.5T magnetic resonance
imaging on early murine in-vitro embryo development. J Magn Reson Imaging.
2001;13(3):417-420.
47. Clements H, Duncan KR, Fielding K, et al. Infants exposed to MRI in utero
have a normal paediatric assessment at 9 months of age. Br J Radiol.
2000;73(866):190-194.
48. Glover P, Hykin J, Gowland P, et al. An assessment of the intrauterine sound
intensity level during obstetric echo-planar magnetic resonance imaging. Br
J Radiol. 1995;68(814):1090-1094.
49. Kok RD, de Vries MM, Heerschap A, van den Berg PP. Absence of harmful
efects of magnetic resonance exposure at 1.5 T in utero during the third
trimester of pregnancy: a follow-up study. Magn Reson Imaging.
2004;22(6):851-854.
50. Levine D, Zuo C, Faro CB, Chen Q. Potential heating efect in the gravid
uterus during MR HASTE imaging. J Magn Reson Imaging. 2001;13(6):
856-861.
51. Merkle EM, Dale BM, Paulson EK. Abdominal MR imaging at 3T. Magn
Reson Imaging Clin N Am. 2006;14(1):17-26.
52. Myers C, Duncan KR, Gowland PA, et al. Failure to detect intrauterine growth
restriction following in utero exposure to MRI. Br J Radiol. 1998;71(845):
549-551.
53. Schwartz JL, Crooks LE. NMR imaging produces no observable mutations
or cytotoxicity in mammalian cells. AJR Am J Roentgenol. 1982;139(3):
583-585.
54. Shellock FG, Crues JV. MR procedures: biologic efects, safety, and patient
care. Radiology. 2004;232(3):635-652.
55. U.S. Food and Drug Administration. Guidance for content and review of a
magnetic resonance diagnostic device 510 (k) application. Washington, DC:
FDA; 1988.
56. Cannie M, De Keyser F, Van Laere S, et al. Potential heating efect in the
gravid uterus by using 3T MR imaging protocols: experimental study in
miniature pigs. Radiology. 2016;754-761.
57. Shellock FG, Kanal E. Bioefects and safety of MR procedures. In: Edelman
RR, Hesselink JR, Zlatkin MB, editors. Clinical magnetic resonance imaging.
2nd ed. Philadelphia: Saunders; 1996. p. 429.
58. Laboratories B. Magnevist product information. Wayne, NJ: Berlex Laboratories;
1994.
59. Runge VM. Safety of approved MR contrast media for intravenous injection.
J Magn Reson Imaging. 2000;12(2):205-213.