Summary

Estado del Arte craneal imágenes por ultrasonido en neonatos

Published: February 02, 2015
doi:

Summary

Cranial ultrasound (CUS) is a valuable tool for brain imaging in critically ill neonates. This video shows a comprehensive approach for neonatal (Doppler) CUS for both clinical and research purposes, including a bedside demonstration of the technique.

Abstract

Cranial ultrasound (CUS) is a reputable tool for brain imaging in critically ill neonates. It is safe, relatively cheap and easy to use, even when a patient is unstable. In addition it is radiation-free and allows serial imaging. CUS possibilities have steadily expanded. However, in many neonatal intensive care units, these possibilities are not optimally used. We present a comprehensive approach for neonatal CUS, focusing on optimal settings, different probes, multiple acoustic windows and Doppler techniques. This approach is suited for both routine clinical practice and research purposes. In a live demonstration, we show how this technique is performed in the neonatal intensive care unit. Using optimal settings and probes allows for better imaging quality and improves the diagnostic value of CUS in experienced hands. Traditionally, images are obtained through the anterior fontanel. Use of supplemental acoustic windows (lambdoid, mastoid, and lateral fontanels) improves detection of brain injury. Adding Doppler studies allows screening of patency of large intracranial arteries and veins. Flow velocities and indices can be obtained. Doppler CUS offers the possibility of detecting cerebral sinovenous thrombosis at an early stage, creating a window for therapeutic intervention prior to thrombosis-induced tissue damage. Equipment, data storage and safety aspects are also addressed.

Introduction

Since its clinical introduction in the late 1970’s cranial ultrasound (CUS) has been widely used for detecting congenital anomalies and acquired brain lesions during the neonatal period. In many neonatal intensive care units (NICUs), CUS has become indispensable in the care for critically ill neonates. Major advantages are its relatively low cost and the fact that it can be performed at bedside, even when a patient is unstable. In addition it is radiation-free and allows for serial imaging. Another technique often used for neuroimaging in critically ill neonates is magnetic resonance imaging (MRI). MRI provides excellent image quality, but its clinical use in NICU’s is currently limited because of logistic and safety issues1.

Over time, quality of CUS has drastically improved, with advancing technique leading to higher resolution, faster image processing and digital display and back-up. Important brain structures can be adequately visualized using optimal settings. Traditionally, images are obtained through the anterior fontanel. This approach is less suitable for evaluation of infratentorial structures because they are located far away from the transducer and the highly echoic tentorium impedes their assessment. Use of high-frequency linear transducers through alternative acoustic windows and adapted settings also provides access to these brain regions. Examples of these supplemental acoustic windows are the lambdoid (posterior), mastoid and lateral (temporal) fontanels. So far, however, only few NICUs use these additional acoustic windows routinely2-5. Doppler techniques can be used for screening patency of intracranial vessels. Flow velocities and indices in cerebral arteries can also be obtained. Some manufacturers now provide hardware to visualize flow around 2 cm/sec (Raets, et al., unpublished data). Small vessels are well displayed: medullary trunks and channels, subependymal veins tributing to the thalamostriate veins, and perforator arteries.

We present our approach of neonatal CUS, focusing on the use of different transducers, multiple acoustic windows and Doppler techniques. Neonatologists and radiologists use this approach in daily clinical practice but is also suitable for research purposes. In the practical part of the video we demonstrate bedside use in the NICU.

Protocol

NOTA: Este protocolo se ajusta a las directrices del comité de ética de investigación en humanos local. 1. Consideraciones generales NOTA: Consideraciones generales sobre los equipos, almacenamiento y seguridad de los datos se tratan en la Discusión. Obtener imágenes con una alta resolución, en tiempo real, móvil máquina de ultrasonido en 2D con múltiples transductores con una banda de frecuencias (ver Discusión). Típicamente, obtener imáge…

Representative Results

Ejemplos de formación de imágenes hecha de acuerdo con el protocolo descrito se presentan en las Figuras 1 – 7. Las imágenes deben ser cuidadosamente interpretados por un observador experimentado. Imagen simétrica es necesaria para una adecuada interpretación de las imágenes coronales realizadas a través de la fontanela anterior (Figura 1). Cualquier lesión sospechosa debe ser visualizado en tanto a como (medio) plano sagital coronal o por la visualización a tr…

Discussion

Describimos y demostrar un enfoque estado-of-the-art para CUS Doppler neonatal. En manos expertas, esta es una excelente herramienta para, junto a la cama de serie de imágenes del cerebro neonatal seguro. En muchas UCIN no se utilizan de forma óptima las posibilidades descritas. Adición de estudios Doppler permite la detección de la permeabilidad de las arterias intracraneales y las venas. Las velocidades de flujo pueden ser evaluados y los índices obtenidos. Doppler CUS permite la detección de trombosis seno-veno…

Divulgations

The authors have nothing to disclose.

Acknowledgements

We thank the nurses (appearing on film) for supporting the neonates.

We thank J. Hagoort, MA, linguist, Department of Pediatric Surgery, Erasmus MC-Sophia Children’s Hospital, Rotterdam, the Netherlands, for reading and correcting the manuscript.

Materials

Name of Material/ Equipment Company Catalog Number Comments/Description
MyLab 70 Esaote (Genoa, Italy) Ultrasound system

References

  1. Plaisier, A., et al. Safety of routine early MRI in preterm infants. Pediatric Radiology. 42 (10), 1205-1211 (2012).
  2. Raets, M. M. A., et al. Serial Cranial US for Detection of Cerebral Sinovenous Thrombosis in Preterm Infants. Radiology. 269 (3), 879-886 (2013).
  3. Di Salvo, D. N. A new view of the neonatal brain: Clinical utility of supplemental neurologic US imaging windows. Radiographics. 21 (4), 943-955 (2001).
  4. Enriquez, G., et al. Mastoid fontanelle approach for sonographic imaging of the neonatal brain. Pediatric Radiology. 36 (6), 532-540 (2006).
  5. Luna, J. A., Goldstein, R. B. Sonographic visualization of neonatal posterior fossa abnormalities through the posterolateral fontanelle. AJR Am J Roentgenol. 174 (2), 561-567 (2000).
  6. Als, H., et al. Individualized Behavioral and Environmental Care for the Very-Low-Birth-Weight Preterm Infant at High-Risk for Bronchopulmonary Dysplasia – Neonatal Intensive-Care Unit and Developmental Outcome. Pediatrics. 78 (6), 1123-1132 (1986).
  7. Govaert, P., de Vries, L. S. . An Atlas of Neonatal Brain Sonography. , (2010).
  8. Gray, P. H., Griffin, E. A., Drumm, J. E., Fitzgerald, D. E., Duignan, N. M. Continuous Wave Doppler Ultrasound in Evaluation of Cerebral Blood-Flow in Neonates. Archives of Disease in Childhood. 58 (9), 677-681 (1983).
  9. Seibert, J. J., et al. Duplex Pulsed Doppler Ultrasonography Versus Intracranial-Pressure in the Neonate – Clinical and Experimental Studies. Radiology. 171 (1), 155-159 (1989).
  10. Volpe, J. J., Perlman, J. M., Hill, A., Mcmenamin, J. B. Cerebral Blood-Flow Velocity in the Human Newborn – the Value of Its Determination. Pediatrics. 70 (1), 147-152 (1982).
  11. Correa, F., et al. Posterior fontanelle sonography: An acoustic window into the neonatal brain. American Journal of Neuroradiology. 25 (7), 1274-1282 (2004).
  12. Helmke, K., Winkler, P., Kock, C. Sonographic examination of the brain stem area in infants. An echographic and anatomic analysis. Pediatric Radiology. 17 (1), 1-6 (1987).
  13. Elder, J. A., Chou, C. K. Auditory response to pulsed radiofrequency energy. Bioelectromagnetics. , S162-S173 (2003).
  14. Brennan, C. M., Taylor, G. A. Sonographic imaging of the posterior fossa utilizing the foramen magnum. Pediatric Radiology. 40 (8), 1411-1416 (2010).
  15. Rutherford, M. A., et al. Magnetic resonance imaging of white matter diseases of prematurity. Neuroradiology. 52 (6), 505-521 (2010).
  16. Wezel-Meijler, G., Steggerda, S. J., Leijser, L. M. Cranial Ultrasonography in Neonates: Role and Limitations. Seminars in Perinatology. 34 (1), 28-38 (2010).
  17. Leijser, L. M., de Vries, L. S., Cowan, F. M. Using cerebral ultrasound effectively in the newborn infant. Early Human Development. 82 (12), 827-835 (2006).
  18. Houston, L. E., Odibo, A. O., Macones, G. A. The safety of obstetrical ultrasound: a review. Prenatal Diagnosis. 29 (13), 1204-1212 (2009).
  19. Torloni, M. R., et al. Safety of ultrasonography in pregnancy: WHO systematic review of the literature and meta-analysis. Ultrasound in Obstetrics & Gynecology. 33 (5), 599-608 (2009).
check_url/fr/52238?article_type=t

Play Video

Citer Cet Article
Ecury-Goossen, G. M., Camfferman, F. A., Leijser, L. M., Govaert, P., Dudink, J. State of the Art Cranial Ultrasound Imaging in Neonates. J. Vis. Exp. (96), e52238, doi:10.3791/52238 (2015).

View Video