Feature | Magnetic Resonance Imaging (MRI) | September 07, 2016

MRIs in Pregnancy Safe, But Gadolinium Scans May Raise Risk to Fetus

Study finds MRIs in first trimester of pregnancy were not associated with increased risk

Fetal MRI image on Philips Ingenia 1.5T

This study found MRI is safe by itself, but the use of gadolinium contrast may be a factor involved with an array of issues that impact the fetus and young children after birth.  

Fetal MRI image slider

September 7, 2016 — In an analysis that included more than 1.4 million births, exposure to magnetic resonance imaging (MRI) during the first trimester of pregnancy compared with nonexposure was not associated with increased risk of harm to the fetus or in early childhood. However, data suggests gadolinium contrast enhanced MRI scans at any time during pregnancy may be associated with an increased risk of a broad set of rheumatological, inflammatory or skin conditions and, possibly, for stillbirth or neonatal death, according to a study appearing in the Sept. 6, 2016, issue of Journal of the American Medical Association (JAMA).[1]

Concern has been expressed about the safety of MRI exposure in the first trimester of pregnancy due to the heating of sensitive tissues by radiofrequency fields and exposure to the loud acoustic environment. When indicated, MRI's diagnostic accuracy is improved with gadolinium, an intravenous contrast agent. Fetal safety of MRI during the first trimester of pregnancy or with gadolinium enhancement at any time of pregnancy is unknown. While MRI is generally thought to be safe for the fetus in the second or third trimesters of pregnancy, there were no prior controlled studies on its safety in the first trimester, when the fetus forms its major organs and body structures.

 

Watch the VIDEO "MRI Gadolinium Contrast Retention in the Brain."

 

To inform clinical guidelines for MRIs on pregnant women, Joel G. Ray, M.D., M.Sc., FRCPC, of St. Michael's Hospital and the Institute for Clinical Evaluative Sciences, Toronto, and colleagues used health data housed at the Institute for Clinical Evaluative Sciences to examine records of more than 1.4 million births in Ontario from 2003-2015. They compared women who had first-trimester MRIs with those who had not, and also followed their children up to age 4. 

In pregnancies that lasted a minimum of 21 gestational weeks, 1 in 250 had an MRI in pregnancy, including 1 in 1,200 in the first trimester and 1 in 3,000 with gadolinium contrast. Maternal MRI in the first trimester was not associated with a higher risk of stillbirth or neonatal death, congenital anomalies, neoplasm or hearing loss.

"Having an MRI at the earliest stages of pregnancy does not seem to alter the development of the fetus," Ray said.

However, exposure to gadolinium-enhanced MRI at any gestation was not associated with a greater risk of congenital anomalies. Although a nephrogenic systemic fibrosis-like outcome was extremely rare, gadolinium-enhanced MRI was associated with an increased risk for a non-specific outcome of any rheumatological, inflammatory or infiltrative skin condition up to age 4 years, and for stillbirth or neonatal death, although there were just seven events in the gadolinium MRI group.

"The current findings inform published recommendations about the safety of MRI in the first trimester of pregnancy," the authors wrote. "Until further studies are done, these findings suggest that gadolinium contrast should be avoided during pregnancy."

Read the article “Gadolinium May Remain in Brain after Contrast MRI.” 

Even though the actual number of stillbirths was low (one in 50), and the outcome of a skin or rheumatological condition was very broadly defined, Ray said the results support clinical guidelines to avoid giving pregnant women gadolinium unless strongly indicated.

The current study did not include specific information as to why the women received an MRI, or whether they knew they were pregnant at the time. But the study did track the specialty of the physician ordering the MRI: 44 percent were family physicians, suggesting the MRI may have been booked prior to a woman having conceived. The other common specialty was a neurologist or neurosurgeon, suggesting that some women were investigated for headaches or spinal disc issues.

For more information http://jama.jamanetwork.com/article.aspx?doi=10.1001/jama.2016.12126

 

Related Gadolinium Safety Concern Articles

Gadolinium May Remain in Brain after Contrast MRI

ACR Manual on Contrast Media Addresses FDA Gadolinium Safety Concerns

Study Finds No Association Between Gadolinium Contrast and Nervous System Disorder

Even High Doses of Gadolinium-Based Contrast Agents Doesn't Cause NSF

Reference: 

1. Joel G. Ray, Marian J. Vermeulen, Aditya Bharatha, et al. “Association Between MRI Exposure During Pregnancy and Fetal and Childhood Outcomes.” JAMA. 2016;316(9):952-961. doi:10.1001/jama.2016.12126.

Related Content

“Everybody cares about radiation dose, but the most sensitive to radiation are children, because they’re growing.”  —Richard Towbin, M.D., Chief of Radiology, Phoenix Children’s Hospital

“Everybody cares about radiation dose, but the most sensitive to radiation are children, because they’re growing.”
—Richard Towbin, M.D., Chief of Radiology, Phoenix Children’s Hospital

Sponsored Content | Case Study | Radiation Dose Management | April 09, 2020
Medical imaging plays an increasing role in the accurate diagnosis and treatment of numerous medical conditions.
Table 1. Compared to 2-D mammography, which yields four images per patient, digital breast tomosynthesis (DBT), or 3-D mammography, produces hundreds of images per patient. While this provides more information for clinicians, the exponential increase in data can result in reader fatigue and burnout, which may ultimately affect patient care.

Table 1. Compared to 2-D mammography, which yields four images per patient, digital breast tomosynthesis (DBT), or 3-D mammography, produces hundreds of images per patient. While this provides more information for clinicians, the exponential increase in data can result in reader fatigue and burnout, which may ultimately affect patient care.

Sponsored Content | Case Study | Artificial Intelligence | April 09, 2020
As the largest independent imaging group in Michigan with 10 locations across the state,...
Figure 1. R MLO view from four different years. The skin mole is marked with a circular skin marker (TomoSPOT REF# 782, Beekley Medical) on the far-left image. These images demonstrate the potential for significant variability in location of the skin lesion due to movability of the skin during positioning.

Figure 1. R MLO view from four different years. The skin mole is marked with a circular skin marker (TomoSPOT REF# 782, Beekley Medical) on the far-left image. These images demonstrate the potential for significant variability in location of the skin lesion due to movability of the skin during positioning. 

Sponsored Content | Case Study | Breast Imaging | April 09, 2020
Christina Jacobs, M.D., Director of Breast Imaging (...
A recent study earlier this year in the journal Nature, which included researchers from Google Health London, demonstrated that artificial intelligence (AI) technology outperformed radiologists in diagnosing breast cancer on mammograms
Feature | Breast Imaging | April 06, 2020 | By Samir Parikh
A recent study earlier this year in the journal Nature,
Feature | Breast Density | April 03, 2020 | By Dayna Williams M.D., Shivani Chaudhry, M.D., and Laurie R. Margolies, M.D.
Breast cancer is the most common cance
#COVID19 #Coronavirus #2019nCoV #Wuhanvirus #SARScov2 New studies use SIRD model to forecast COVID-19 spread; examine patient CT scans to correlate clinical features with mortality

Fig 1. A sample scoring on CT images of a 63-year-old woman from mortality group demonstrated a total score of 63. It was calculated as: for upper zone (A), 3 (consolidation) × 3 (50–75% distribution) × 2 (both right and left lungs) + 2 (ground glass opacity) ×1 (< 25% distribution) × 2 (both right and left lungs); for middle zone (B), 3 (consolidation) × 2 (25–50% distribution) × 2 (both right and left lungs) + 2 (ground glass opacity) × 2 (25–50% distribution) × 2 (both right and left lungs); for lower zone (C), 3 (consolidation) × (2 (25–50% distribution of the right lung) + 3 (50–75% distribution of the left lung)) + 2 (ground glass opacity) × (2 (25–50% distribution of the right lung) + 1 (< 25% distribution of the left lung)) Yuan et al, 2020 (CC BY 4.0)

News | Coronavirus (COVID-19) | April 01, 2020
April 1, 2020 — A new study, ...
#COVID19 #Coronavirus #2019nCoV #Wuhanvirus #SARScov2 A brief article from Henry Ford Health System in Detroit, published today in Radiology, reports on the first presumptive case of COVID-19–associated acute necrotizing hemorrhagic encephalopathy.

A, Image from noncontrast head CT demonstrates symmetric hypoattenuation within the bilateral medial thalami (arrows). B, Axial CT venogram demonstrates patency of the cerebral venous vasculature, including the internal cerebral veins (arrows). C, Coronal reformat of aCT angiogram demonstrates normal appearance of the basilar artery and proximal posterior cerebral arteries. Image courtesy of the Radiological Society of North America (RSNA)

News | Coronavirus (COVID-19) | March 31, 2020
March 31, 2020 — A brief article fr
#COVID19 #Coronavirus #2019nCoV #Wuhanvirus #SARScov2
News | Mammography | March 25, 2020
March 25, 2020 — The...