Abstract
Selecting the appropriate neurologic imaging modality for evaluation of a pregnant patient is a common challenge faced by medical providers. It requires balancing the benefits of using the technique that provides the greatest diagnostic utility with the potential risks to the fetus which that technique may incur. This decision process is made more difficult by the lack of high quality human studies to date that have evaluated the safety of these different imaging methods. The aim of this chapter is to review the available literature on the most common neurologic imaging modalities and their use in pregnancy, in order to provide guidance on selection of the optimal imaging choice in different clinical situations.
*J.M. Thon and R.W. Regenhardt are co-first authors of this chapter.
This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.
Access this chapter
Tax calculation will be finalised at checkout
Purchases are for personal use only
Change history
10 May 2019
This book was inadvertently published with the below errors:
References
Bove RM, Klein JP. Neuroradiology in women of childbearing age. Continuum (Minneap Minn). 2014;20(1 Neurology of Pregnancy):23–41.
ACOG Committee on Obstetric Practice. ACOG Committee Opinion. Number 299, September 2004 (replaces No. 158, September 1995). Guidelines for diagnostic imaging during pregnancy. Obstet Gynecol. 2004;104(3):647–51.
Manual on Contrast Media v10.3 – American College of Radiology [Internet]. [cited 2017 Oct 25]. Available from: https://www.acr.org/Quality-Safety/Resources/Contrast-Manual.
Webb JAW, Thomsen HS, Morcos SK. Members of contrast media safety committee of european society of urogenital radiology (ESUR). The use of iodinated and gadolinium contrast media during pregnancy and lactation. Eur Radiol. 2005;15(6):1234–40.
Hall EJ, Giaccia AJ. Radiobiology for the radiologist. Philadelphia: Lippincott Williams & Wilkins; 2006. p. 546.
Osei EK, Faulkner K. Fetal doses from radiological examinations. Br J Radiol. 1999;72(860):773–80.
Wakeford R, Little MP. Risk coefficients for childhood cancer after intrauterine irradiation: a review. Int J Radiat Biol. 2003;79(5):293–309.
Yamazaki JN, Schull WJ. Perinatal loss and neurological abnormalities among children of the atomic bomb. Nagasaki and Hiroshima revisited, 1949 to 1989. JAMA. 1990;264(5):605–9.
Nelson JA, Livingston GK, Moon RG. Mutagenic evaluation of radiographic contrast media. Investig Radiol. 1982;17(2):183–5.
Grüters A, Krude H. Detection and treatment of congenital hypothyroidism. Nat Rev Endocrinol. 2011;8(2):104–13.
Klingebiel R, Kentenich M, Bauknecht H-C, Masuhr F, Siebert E, Busch M, et al. Comparative evaluation of 64-slice CT angiography and digital subtraction angiography in assessing the cervicocranial vasculature. Vasc Health Risk Manag. Dove Press. 2008;4(4):901–7.
Manninen A-L, Isokangas J-M, Karttunen A, Siniluoto T, Nieminen MTA. Comparison of radiation exposure between diagnostic CTA and DSA examinations of cerebral and cervicocerebral vessels. Am J Neuroradiol. 2012;33(11):2038–42.
Moon EK, Wang W, Newman JS, Bayona-Molano MDP. Challenges in interventional radiology: the pregnant patient. Semin Interv Radiol. Thieme Medical Publishers. 2013;30(4):394–402.
Grzyska U, Freitag J, Zeumer H. Selective cerebral intraarterial DSA. Complication rate and control of risk factors. Neuroradiology. 1990;32(4):296–9.
Hartwig V, Giovannetti G, Vanello N, Lombardi M, Landini L, Simi S. Biological effects and safety in magnetic resonance imaging: a review. Int J Environ Res Public Health. Multidisciplinary Digital Publishing Institute (MDPI). 2009;6(6):1778–98.
Kanal E, Shellock FG, Talagala L. Safety considerations in MR imaging. Radiology. 1990;176(3):593–606.
Chen MM, Coakley FV, Kaimal A, Laros RK. Guidelines for computed tomography and magnetic resonance imaging use during pregnancy and lactation. Obstet Gynecol. 2008;112(2 Pt 1):333–40.
Kanal E, Barkovich AJ, Bell C, Borgstede JP, Bradley WG, Froelich JW, et al. ACR guidance document on MR safe practices: 2013. J Magn Reson Imaging. 2013;37(3):501–30.
Committee on Obstetric Practice. Committee opinion No. 723: guidelines for diagnostic imaging during pregnancy and lactation. Obstet Gynecol. 2017;130(4):e210–6.
Ray JG, Vermeulen MJ, Bharatha A, Montanera WJ, Park AL. Association between MRI exposure during pregnancy and fetal and childhood outcomes. JAMA. 2016;316(9):952–61.
Prola-Netto J, Woods M, Roberts VHJ, Sullivan EL, Miller CA, Frias AE, et al. Gadolinium chelate safety in pregnancy: barely detectable gadolinium levels in the juvenile nonhuman primate after in utero exposure. Radiology. 2017;286:162534.
Marcos HB, Semelka RC, Worawattanakul S. Normal placenta: gadolinium-enhanced dynamic MR imaging. Radiology. 1997;205(2):493–6.
Tanaka YO, Sohda S, Shigemitsu S, Niitsu M, Itai Y. High temporal resolution dynamic contrast MRI in a high risk group for placenta accreta. Magn Reson Imaging. 2001;19(5):635–42.
Sundgren PC, Leander P. Is administration of gadolinium-based contrast media to pregnant women and small children justified? J Magn Reson Imaging. 2011;34(4):750–7.
Fraum TJ, Ludwig DR, Bashir MR, Fowler KJ. Gadolinium-based contrast agents: a comprehensive risk assessment. J Magn Reson Imaging. 2017;46(2):338–53.
De Santis M, Straface G, Cavaliere AF, Carducci B, Caruso A. Gadolinium periconceptional exposure: pregnancy and neonatal outcome. Acta Obstet Gynecol Scand. 2007;86(1):99–101.
Author information
Authors and Affiliations
Editor information
Editors and Affiliations
Rights and permissions
Copyright information
© 2019 Springer Nature Switzerland AG
About this chapter
Cite this chapter
Thon, J.M., Regenhardt, R.W., Klein, J.P. (2019). Neurologic Imaging in Pregnancy. In: O’Neal, M. (eds) Neurology and Psychiatry of Women. Springer, Cham. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-030-04245-5_12
Download citation
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-030-04245-5_12
Published:
Publisher Name: Springer, Cham
Print ISBN: 978-3-030-04244-8
Online ISBN: 978-3-030-04245-5
eBook Packages: MedicineMedicine (R0)