3D vs 2D Transcranial Ultrasound in NICU

  • Research type

    Research Study

  • Full title

    Can 3D cranial ultrasound be used to successfully reconstruct a 2D image without compromising on image quality in a neonatal population? A proof of concept study.

  • IRAS ID

    237123

  • Contact name

    David Grier

  • Contact email

    david.grier@uhbristol.nhs.uk

  • Sponsor organisation

    Research & Innovation, University Hospitals Bristol NHS Foundation Trust

  • Duration of Study in the UK

    1 years, 0 months, 1 days

  • Research summary

    Patients on the neonatal intensive care unit (NICU) often require imaging of their brain to look for intracranial haemorrhage or other complications. These are commonly seen in pre-term babies, or term infants with birth asphyxia, seizures, or congenital infections.

    Ultrasound is the imaging modality of choice as it does not use ionising radiation, and is performed at the bedside. 2-dimensional (2D) ultrasound requires significant training to obtain adequate quality images in the standard planes. For this reason, it is not available at most sites, being a specialist hospital scan. 3-dimensional (3D) ultrasound images are easier and quicker to acquire, as they do not need complex training. This may be of benefit to patients that are sick and immobilised by medical paraphernalia such as ventilators. These images can be reconstructed using computer software into the 2D images in the standard planes.

    If the image quality of these reconstructions is equal to a 2D-acquired scan for diagnostic purposes, then these could be performed at remote sites, where 2D trained specialists are not available. The resultant images could then be sent on to tertiary referral centres and interpreted by specialists without the need for the infant to travel hundreds of miles in a sub-optimal clinical condition.

    To find out whether this is possible, we first want to carry out a proof of concept study to ensure that the 3D scans can be reconstructed to provide a 2D image, without loss of quality, or loss of features over that seen in the 2D scan. We will also validate the anecdotal evidence that the 3D scan can be performed more easily, and is more time effective, than the 2D scan.

  • REC name

    London - City & East Research Ethics Committee

  • REC reference

    18/LO/1262

  • Date of REC Opinion

    16 Jul 2018

  • REC opinion

    Favourable Opinion