Skip to main content
Key Specialties
Cardiology Diabetology Endocrinology Gastroenterology Geriatrics and Gerontology Gynecology and Obstetrics Hematology Infectious Disease Internal Medicine Nephrology Neurology Oncology Pediatrics Respiratory Medicine Rheumatology Surgery
Congress Coverage
2024 ACC Congress 2023 ESMO Congress 2023 EASD Congress 2023 ERS Congress 2023 ESC Congress
Clinical Collections
Advances in Alzheimer’s

Keynote webinar | Spotlight on medication adherence

LIVE: Thursday 27th June 2024, 18:00-19:30 (CEST)
Join our expert panel to discover why you need to understand the drivers of non-adherence in your patients, and how you can optimize medication adherence in your clinics to drastically improve patient outcomes.
ADVANCED SEARCH
Log in
Top
European Radiology
Published in: European Radiology 10/2019

01-10-2019 | Magnetic Resonance Imaging | Head and Neck

The prenatal diagnosis and classification of cleft palate: the role and value of magnetic resonance imaging

Authors: Weizeng Zheng, Baohua Li, Yu Zou, Fenlan Lou

Published in: European Radiology | Issue 10/2019

Login to get access

Abstract

Objective

The aim of this study was to evaluate the value of MRI in the prenatal diagnosis and classification of cleft palate (CP).

Methods

We collected 94 fetal cases that were suspected of cleft palate with or without cleft lip by prenatal ultrasound (US) and then carried out further MRI to examine the entire body of each fetus within 1 week. The diagnoses resulting from MRI and US examination were compared separately with the final diagnoses obtained from postnatal physical examination or fetal autopsy. The diagnostic accuracy between MRI and US was then determined.

Results

During the follow-up period, the results for 6 fetuses (6.38%) were lost. Of the remaining 88 cases, the final diagnoses identified 23 cases of cleft lip (CL), 45 cases of unilateral cleft lip with cleft palate (UCLP), 4 cases of median cleft lip with cleft palate (MCLP), 12 cases of bilateral cleft lip with cleft palate (BCLP), 3 cases of unilateral cleft lip and cleft alveolus (CLA), and 1 case of isolated cleft palate (CPO). The total accuracy rate of US was 59.09%, while that of MRI was 92.05%. More importantly, 81 cases were accurately identified by MRI; the accuracy rate for CL, UCLP, MCLP, BCLP, CLA, and CPO was 86.96%, 95.56%, 100%, 91.67%, 66.67%, and 100%, respectively.

Conclusion

Our results suggest that MRI could be a useful adjunct to US examination in the prenatal diagnosis of fetuses with cleft palate, and further demonstrates the classification and degree of involvement of the cleft palate.

Key Points

• MRI is a useful adjunct to prenatal ultrasound.
• MRI has a higher accuracy rate for CP.
• The accurate classification of CP diagnosed by MRI can guide clinical management.
Literature
1.
Vanderas AP (1987) Incidence of cleft lip, cleft palate, and cleft lip and palate among races: a review. Cleft Palate J 24:216–225PubMed
2.
Wong FW, King NM (1997) A review of the rate of occurrence of cleft lip and palate in Chinese people. Hong Kong Med J 3:96–100PubMed
3.
Descamps MJ, Golding SJ, Sibley J, McIntyre A, Alvey C, Goodacre T (2010) MRI for definitive in utero diagnosis of cleft palate: a useful adjunct to antenatal care? Cleft Palate Craniofac J 47:578–585CrossRefPubMed
4.
Ha S, Koh KS, Moon H, Jung S, Oh TS (2015) Clinical outcomes of primary palatal surgery in children with nonsyndromic cleft palate with and without lip. Biomed Res Int 2015:185459CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentral
5.
Goodacre T, Swan MC (2008) Cleft lip and palate: current management. Paediatr Child Health 18:283–292CrossRef
6.
7.
Mossey PA, Little J, Munger RG, Dixon MJ, Shaw WC (2009) Cleft lip and palate. Lancet 374:1773–1785CrossRefPubMed
8.
Allori AC, Mulliken JB, Meara JG, Shusterman S, Marcus JR (2017) Classification of cleft lip/palate: then and now. Cleft Palate Craniofac J 54:175–188CrossRefPubMed
9.
Dabadie A, Quarello E, Degardin N et al (2016) Added value of MRI for the prenatal diagnosis of isolated orofacial clefts and comparison with ultrasound. Diagn Interv Imaging 97:915–921CrossRefPubMed
10.
11.
12.
Freitas JA, Almeida AL, Soares S et al (2013) Rehabilitative treatment of cleft lip and palate: experience of the Hospital for Rehabilitation of Craniofacial Anomalies/USP (HRAC/USP)-part 4: oral rehabilitation. J Appl Oral Sci 21:284
13.
Wang G, Shan R, Zhao L, Zhu X, Zhang X (2011) Fetal cleft lip with and without cleft palate: comparison between MR imaging and US for prenatal diagnosis. Eur J Radiol 79:437–442CrossRefPubMed
14.
Ghi T, Tani G, Savelli L, Colleoni GG, Pilu G, Bovicelli L (2003) Prenatal imaging of facial clefts by magnetic resonance imaging with emphasis on the posterior palate. Prenat Diagn 23:970–975CrossRefPubMed
15.
Triulzi F, Manganaro L, Volpe P (2011) Fetal magnetic resonance imaging: indications, study protocols and safety. Radiol Med 116:337–350CrossRefPubMed
16.
Victoria T, Jaramillo D, Roberts TP et al (2014) Fetal magnetic resonance imaging: jumping from 1.5 to 3 tesla (preliminary experience). Pediatr Radiol 44:376–386CrossRefPubMed
17.
Patenaude Y, Pugash D, Lim K et al (2014) The use of magnetic resonance imaging in the obstetric patient. J Obstet Gynaecol Can 36:349–355CrossRefPubMed
18.
19.
Strizek B, Jani JC, Mucyo E et al (2015) Safety of MR imaging at 1.5 T in fetuses: a retrospective case-control study of birth weights and the effects of acoustic noise. Radiology 275:530–537CrossRefPubMed
20.
Smith FW, Adam AH, Phillips WP (1983) NMR imaging in pregnancy. Lancet 321:61–62CrossRef
21.
22.
Hayat TTA, Rutherford MA (2018) Neuroimaging perspectives on fetal motor behavior. Neurosci Biobehav Rev 92:390–401CrossRefPubMed
23.
Levaillant J-M, Nicot R, Benouaiche L, Couly G, Rotten D (2016) Prenatal diagnosis of cleft lip/palate: the surface rendered oro-palatal (SROP) view of the fetal lips and palate, a tool to improve information-sharing within the orofacial team and with the parents. J Craniomaxillofac Surg 44:835–842CrossRefPubMed
24.
Maarse W, Pistorius L, Van Eeten W et al (2011) Prenatal ultrasound screening for orofacial clefts. Ultrasound Obstet Gynecol 38:434–439CrossRefPubMed
25.
Fuchs F, Burlat J, Grosjean F et al (2018) A score-based method for quality control of fetal hard palate assessment during routine second-trimester ultrasound examination. Acta Obstet Gynecol Scand 11:1300–1308CrossRef
26.
Burnell L, Verchere C, Pugash D, Loock C, Robertson S, Lehman A (2014) Additional post-natal diagnoses following antenatal diagnosis of isolated cleft lip+/− palate. Arch Dis Child Fetal Neonatal Ed 99:F286–F290CrossRefPubMed
27.
Bäumler M, Faure JM, Bigorre M et al (2011) Accuracy of prenatal three-dimensional ultrasound in the diagnosis of cleft hard palate when cleft lip is present. Ultrasound Obstet Gynecol 38:440–444CrossRefPubMed
28.
Kazan-Tannus JF, Levine D, McKenzie C et al (2005) Real-time magnetic resonance imaging aids prenatal diagnosis of isolated cleft palate. J Ultrasound Med 24:1533–1540CrossRefPubMed
29.
Sommerlad M, Patel N, Vijayalakshmi B et al (2010) Detection of lip, alveolar ridge and hard palate abnormalities using two-dimensional ultrasound enhanced with the three-dimensional reverse-face view. Ultrasound Obstet Gynecol 36:596–600CrossRefPubMed
30.
de Milly MN, Alison M, Arthurs O et al (2013) Is fetal cerebral MRI worthwhile in antenatally diagnosed isolated cleft lip with or without palate? Prenat Diagn 33:273–278CrossRefPubMed
31.
Pilu G, Romero R, Reece EA, Jeanty P, Hobbins JC (1986) The prenatal diagnosis of Robin anomalad. Am J Obstet Gynecol 154:630–632CrossRefPubMed
32.
Pacella E, Malvasi A, Tinelli A et al (2010) Stickler syndrome in Pierre-Robin sequence prenatal ultrasonographic diagnosis and postnatal therapy: two cases report. Eur Rev Med Pharmacol Sci 14:1051–1054PubMed
33.
Kobrynski LJ, Sullivan KE (2007) Velocardiofacial syndrome, DiGeorge syndrome: the chromosome 22q11. 2 deletion syndromes. Lancet 370:1443–1452CrossRef
Metadata
Title
The prenatal diagnosis and classification of cleft palate: the role and value of magnetic resonance imaging
Authors
Weizeng Zheng
Baohua Li
Yu Zou
Fenlan Lou
Publication date
01-10-2019
Publisher
Springer Berlin Heidelberg
Published in
European Radiology / Issue 10/2019
Print ISSN: 0938-7994
Electronic ISSN: 1432-1084
DOI
https://doi.org/10.1007/s00330-019-06089-9

Other articles of this Issue 10/2019

European Radiology 10/2019 Go to the issue

Urogenital

Defining the incremental value of 3D T2-weighted imaging in the assessment of prostate cancer extracapsular extension

Head and Neck

US-guided microwave ablation for primary hyperparathyroidism: a safety and efficacy study

Experimental

Comparative reviews of diagnostic test accuracy in imaging research: evaluation of current practices

Oncology

Image-based biomarkers for solid tumor quantification

Urogenital

Multiparametric MRI of the bladder: inter-observer agreement and accuracy with the Vesical Imaging-Reporting and Data System (VI-RADS) at a single reference center

Musculoskeletal

T2 mapping of the meniscus is a biomarker for early osteoarthritis