Emine AYDIN
(Kayseri Eğitim ve Araştırma Hastanesi, Kadın Hastalıkları ve Doğum Kliniği, Kayseri, Türkiye)
Atakan TANACAN
(Hacettepe Üniversitesi, Tıp Fakültesi, Kadın Hastalıkları ve Doğum Anabilim Dalı, Ankara, Türkiye)
Melek BÜYÜKEREN
(Hacettepe Üniversitesi, Tıp Fakültesi, Çocuk Sağlığı ve Hastalıkları Anabilim Dalı, Neonatoloji Birimi, Ankara, Türkiye)
Hasan UÇKAN
(Hacettepe Üniversitesi, Tıp Fakültesi, Kadın Hastalıkları ve Doğum Anabilim Dalı, Ankara, Türkiye)
Murat YURDAKÖK
(Hacettepe Üniversitesi, Tıp Fakültesi, Çocuk Sağlığı ve Hastalıkları Anabilim Dalı, Neonatoloji Birimi, Ankara, Türkiye)
Mehmet Sinan BEKSAÇ
(Hacettepe Üniversitesi, Tıp Fakültesi, Kadın Hastalıkları ve Doğum Anabilim Dalı, Ankara, Türkiye)
Yıl: 2019Cilt: 20Sayı: 3ISSN: 1309-0399 / 1309-0380Sayfa Aralığı: 170 - 177İngilizce

96 0
Congenital central nervous system anomalies: Tenyear single center experience on a challenging issue in perinatal medicine
Objective: Our goal was to highlight the prenatal diagnosis and management of central nervous system (CNS) anomalies through sharing ourclinic’s experience.Material and Methods: We evaluated prenatal findings and postnatal outcomes of neonates who had a CNS anomaly diagnosis in our clinicover a ten-year period. A total of 183 cases with various CNS anomalies were included in the study. Birth or termination preferences of motherswere recorded in all cases, and postnatal diagnosis concordance and prognosis after surgical procedures were evaluated in mothers who choseto continue the pregnancy.Results: The mean maternal age was 28.2±5.5 years, mean gravida was 2.2±1.3, and the mean gestational age at diagnosis was 30.5±5.5 weeks.Seventy-five out of 183 (41%) patients chose to terminate their pregnancy. Twenty babies (26.6%) in the termination of pregnancy group hadadditional anomalies. One hundred eight patients gave birth at our institution. The mean birth weight was 3060±647.5 g, the mean gestationalweek at delivery was 37.9±1.7 weeks, and mean APGAR score (5th minute) was 8.8±2.3. Four neonates died on the postpartum first day. Thepostnatal diagnosis of 60 of the 108 (55.5%) patients who gave birth was concordant with the prenatal diagnosis, and 32 of the 108 (29.6%) babiesunderwent surgical interventions.Conclusion: CNS anomalies have a broad spectrum and variable prognoses. This study highlights the limitations of prenatal diagnoses, andthe need for parents to have this information in order to determine the course of their pregnancy and prepare themselves for the postnatalchallenging treatment/rehabilitation process. (J Turk Ger Gynecol Assoc 2019; 20: 170-7)
DergiAraştırma MakalesiErişime Açık
  • 1. Icenogle DA, Kaplan AM. A review of congenital neurologic malformations. Clin Pediatr (Phila) 1981; 20: 565-76.
  • 2. De Noronha L, Medeiros F, Martins VD, Sampaio GA, Serapiao MJ, Kastin G, et al. Malformations of the central nervous system: analysis of 157 pediatric autopsies. Arq Neuropsiquiatr 2000; 58: 890-6.
  • 3. Kehl S, Schelkle A, Thomas A, Puhl A, Meqdad K, Tuschy B, et al. Single deepest vertical pocket or amniotic fluid index as evaluation test for predicting adverse pregnancy outcome (SAFE trial): a multicenter, open-label, randomized controlled trial. Ultrasound Obstet Gynecol 2016; 47: 674-9.
  • 4. Rossi AC, Prefumo F. Additional value of fetal magnetic resonance imaging in the prenatal diagnosis of central nervous system anomalies: a systematic review of the literature. Ultrasound Obstet Gynecol 2014; 44: 388-93.
  • 5. Spirt BA, Oliphant M, Gordon LP. Fetal central nervous system abnormalities. Radiol Clin North Am 1990; 28: 59-73.
  • 6. Bayar Ü, Başaran M, Usal D, Özcan O, Kalaycı M. Prenatal diagnosis and management of congenital abnormalities of central nervous system. Gynecology Obstetrics & Reproductive Medicine 2006; 12: 202-8.
  • 7. Rossi C, Brisou G, Baseggio L, Roch J, Safar V, Karlin L, et al. Central nervous system involvement in chronic lymphocytic leukemia: uncommon manifestation with undefined therapeutic management. Leuk Lymphoma 2014; 55: 1939-41.
  • 8. Pugash D, Brugger PC, Bettelheim D, Prayer D. Prenatal ultrasound and fetal MRI: the comparative value of each modality in prenatal diagnosis. Eur J Radiol 2008; 68: 214-26.
  • 9. Weston MJ. Magnetic resonance imaging in fetal medicine: a pictorial review of current and developing indications. Postgrad Med J 2010; 86: 42-51.
  • 10. Wallis D, Muenke M. Mutations in holoprosencephaly. Hum Mutat 2000; 16: 99-108.
  • 11. Timor-Tritsch IE, Monteagudo A, Cohen HL. Ultrasonography of the prenatal and neonatal brain: McGraw-Hill, Medical Publishing Division; 2001.
  • 12. Balci S, Aypar E, Altinok G, Boduroglu K, Beksac MS. Prenatal diagnosis in three cases of iniencephaly with unusual postmortem findings. Prenat Diagn 2001; 21: 558-62.
  • 13. Paladini D, Volpe P. Ultrasound of Congenital Fetal Anomalies: Differential Diagnosis and Prognostic Indicators: Taylor & Francis; 2007.
  • 14. Levi Setti PE, Moioli M, Smeraldi A, Cesaratto E, Menduni F, Livio S, et al. Obstetric outcome and incidence of congenital anomalies in 2351 IVF/ICSI babies. J Assist Reprod Genet 2016; 33: 711-7.
  • 15. Rossi AC, Prefumo F. Correlation between fetal autopsy and prenatal diagnosis by ultrasound: A systematic review. Eur J Obstet Gynecol Reprod Biol 2017; 210: 201-6.
  • 16. Abergel A, Lacalm A, Massoud M, Massardier J, des Portes V, Guibaud L. Expanding porencephalic cysts: prenatal imaging and differential diagnosis. Fetal Diagn Ther 2017; 41: 226-33.
  • 17. D'Antonio F, Khalil A, Garel C, Pilu G, Rizzo G, Lerman-Sagie T, et al. Systematic review and meta-analysis of isolated posterior fossa malformations on prenatal ultrasound imaging (part 1): nomenclature, diagnostic accuracy and associated anomalies. Ultrasound Obstet Gynecol 2016; 47: 690-7.
  • 18. Liu Z, Han J, Fu F, Liu J, Li R, Yang X, et al. Outcome of isolated enlarged cisterna magna identified in utero: experience at a single medical center in mainland China. Prenat Diagn 2017; 37: 575-82.
  • 19. Wüest A, Surbek D, Wiest R, Weisstanner C, Bonel H, Steinlin M, et al. Enlarged posterior fossa on prenatal imaging: differential diagnosis, associated anomalies and postnatal outcome. Acta Obstet Gynecol Scand 2017; 96: 837-43.
  • 20. Craven I, Bradburn MJ, Griffiths PD. Antenatal diagnosis of agenesis of the corpus callosum. Clin Radiol 2015; 70: 248-53.
  • 21. Society for Maternal-Fetal Medicine (SMFM); Electronic address: pubs@smfm.org, Fox NS, Monteagudo A, Kuller JA, Craigo S, Norton ME. Mild fetal ventriculomegaly: diagnosis, evaluation, and management. Am J Obstet Gynecol 2018; 219: 2-9.
  • 22. Bulas D. Fetal magnetic resonance imaging as a complement to fetal ultrasonography. Ultrasound Q 2007; 23: 3-22.
  • 23. Breeze AC, Alexander PM, Murdoch EM, Missfelder-Lobos HH, Hackett GA, Lees CC. Obstetric and neonatal outcomes in severe fetal ventriculomegaly. Prenat Diagn 2007; 27: 124-9.
  • 24. Bowman RM, McLone DG, Grant JA, Tomita T, Ito JA. Spina bifida outcome: a 25-year prospective. Pediatr Neurosurg 2001; 34: 114- 20.
  • 25. Tennant PW, Pearce MS, Bythell M, Rankin J. 20-year survival of children born with congenital anomalies: a population-based study. Lancet 2010; 375: 649-56.
  • 26. Amer N, Amer M, Kolkailah M, Al-Dumairy M. Foetal central nervous system anomalies: frequency and foeto-maternal outcome. J Pak Med Assoc 2014; 64: 1282-6.
  • 27. Vasudevan C, McKechnie L, Levene M. Long-term outcome of antenatally diagnosed agenesis of corpus callosum and cerebellar malformations. Semin Fetal Neonatal Med 2012; 17: 295-300.
  • 28. Garel C, Moutard ML. Main congenital cerebral anomalies: how prenatal imaging aids counseling. Fetal Diagn Ther 2014; 35: 229-39.

TÜBİTAK ULAKBİM Ulusal Akademik Ağ ve Bilgi Merkezi Cahit Arf Bilgi Merkezi © 2019 Tüm Hakları Saklıdır.