Purpose Volumetric tomography (3D-CT) is currently considered the gold standard for the diagnosis of craniosynostosis, but its use as the first-line examination for cranial deformities is a topic of debate, because of skull X-ray radiation and low sensitivity and specificity. Cranial ultrasound is an emerging noninvasive radiation-free alternative, but its diagnostic accuracy still needs confirmation. Materials and Methods The present prospective study included 350 infants with skull deformities, who underwent cranial ultrasound as the first-line examination, followed by 3D-CT if the echography results was positive or unclear. If the results were negative, infants underwent physical treatment and follow-up. To evaluate ultrasound reliability, we focused on cases that underwent both the index test and the gold standard and performed a double-blind comparison of the echography and 3D-CT results. Results Ultrasound documented patent sutures in 293 infants and 9 had inconclusive results. The 293 ultrasound-negative infants were followed clinically: all improved, except 28 that underwent 3D-CT. In all of these cases, 3D-CT confirmed the ultrasonography results (no false negatives). 48 infants showed premature suture closure and underwent 3D-CT: 47 were confirmed (true positive), 1 was false positive. The sensitivity was 100%, the specificity was 99.7%, the positive and negative predictive values were 97.9% and 100%, respectively, the accuracy was 99.7%, and the diagnostic test evaluation was conclusive. Conclusion The study documented the high sensitivity and specificity of echography for the diagnosis of craniosynostosis in a referral center, with better results being achieved before 6 months of age. Major limitations are the loss of diagnostic significance as the child grows and the learning curve needed. The advantages are avoidance of radiation and chance to evaluate the brain at the same time.
Surface Cranial Ultrasound: The Natural Heir to X-Ray for the Screening of Skull Deformities in Infants / L.M. Pogliani, G.V. Zuccotti, M. Reggiori, A. Erbetta, M. Lacerenza, F. Prada, M. Furlanetto, I.G. Vetrano, L.G. Valentini. - In: ULTRASCHALL IN DER MEDIZIN. - ISSN 0172-4614. - (2022), pp. 1-9. [Epub ahead of print] [10.1055/a-1820-8101]
Surface Cranial Ultrasound: The Natural Heir to X-Ray for the Screening of Skull Deformities in Infants
G.V. Zuccotti;F. Prada;I.G. VetranoPenultimo
;
2022
Abstract
Purpose Volumetric tomography (3D-CT) is currently considered the gold standard for the diagnosis of craniosynostosis, but its use as the first-line examination for cranial deformities is a topic of debate, because of skull X-ray radiation and low sensitivity and specificity. Cranial ultrasound is an emerging noninvasive radiation-free alternative, but its diagnostic accuracy still needs confirmation. Materials and Methods The present prospective study included 350 infants with skull deformities, who underwent cranial ultrasound as the first-line examination, followed by 3D-CT if the echography results was positive or unclear. If the results were negative, infants underwent physical treatment and follow-up. To evaluate ultrasound reliability, we focused on cases that underwent both the index test and the gold standard and performed a double-blind comparison of the echography and 3D-CT results. Results Ultrasound documented patent sutures in 293 infants and 9 had inconclusive results. The 293 ultrasound-negative infants were followed clinically: all improved, except 28 that underwent 3D-CT. In all of these cases, 3D-CT confirmed the ultrasonography results (no false negatives). 48 infants showed premature suture closure and underwent 3D-CT: 47 were confirmed (true positive), 1 was false positive. The sensitivity was 100%, the specificity was 99.7%, the positive and negative predictive values were 97.9% and 100%, respectively, the accuracy was 99.7%, and the diagnostic test evaluation was conclusive. Conclusion The study documented the high sensitivity and specificity of echography for the diagnosis of craniosynostosis in a referral center, with better results being achieved before 6 months of age. Major limitations are the loss of diagnostic significance as the child grows and the learning curve needed. The advantages are avoidance of radiation and chance to evaluate the brain at the same time.Pubblicazioni consigliate
I documenti in IRIS sono protetti da copyright e tutti i diritti sono riservati, salvo diversa indicazione.