Donald School Journal of Ultrasound in Obstetrics and Gynecology

Register      Login

SEARCH WITHIN CONTENT

FIND ARTICLE

Volume / Issue

Online First

Archive
Volume  18 (2024)
Volume  17 (2023)
Volume  16 (2022)
Volume  15 (2021)
Volume  14 (2020)
Volume  13 (2019)
Volume  12 (2018)
Volume  11 (2017)
Volume  10 (2016)
Volume  9 (2015)
Volume  8 (2014)
Volume  7 (2013)
Volume  6 (2012)
Volume  5 (2011)
Volume  4 (2010)
Volume  3 (2009)
Volume  2 (2008)
Volume  1 (2007)
Related articles

VOLUME 17 , ISSUE 1 ( January-March, 2023 ) > List of Articles

REVIEW ARTICLE

Kurjak Antenatal Neurodevelopmental Test in Fetal Congenital Heart Defects: A Comparison of Antenatal and Postnatal Tests

Sertaç Esin, Nilay C Balci, Deniz A Ince, Emre Gunakan, Ozden Turan, İlknur E Dogan, Birgul Varan, Latife A Karakas, Meltem Aksu, Ilkay Erdogan, Niyazi K Tokel, Ayse Ecevit

Keywords : Amiel-tison neurological assessment at term, Congenital heart defects, Fetal neurologic development, General movements assessment, Kurjak antenatal neurodevelopmental test

Citation Information : Esin S, Balci NC, Ince DA, Gunakan E, Turan O, Dogan İE, Varan B, Karakas LA, Aksu M, Erdogan I, Tokel NK, Ecevit A. Kurjak Antenatal Neurodevelopmental Test in Fetal Congenital Heart Defects: A Comparison of Antenatal and Postnatal Tests. Donald School J Ultrasound Obstet Gynecol 2023; 17 (1):91-96.

DOI: 10.5005/jp-journals-10009-1952

License: CC BY-NC 4.0

Published Online: 14-04-2023

Copyright Statement:  Copyright © 2023; The Author(s).


Abstract

Aim & Background: Kurjak's antenatal development test (KANET) have been developed and aimed to detect fetuses at high neurodevelopmental risk by four-dimensional (4D) ultrasound. Congenital anomalies are one of the most important causes of infant mortality, and CHD remain at the forefront. With abnormal development of the cardiac structures, decreased cerebral oxygen or substrate supply may place the developing fetus at risk for altered brain growth or brain injury. Methods: In this study, we aimed to perform KANET test on fetuses with CHD in the antenatal period and Amiel-Tison (AT) test and General movements (GMs) in the postnatal period and compare antenatal and postnatal scores. Results: We have completed 38 KANET, 28 AT and 26 GMs tests in our cohort. Of thirty-eight infants who had KANET, median score was 15 (4–16). One patient (3%) had abnormal, 6 patients (16%) had borderline and 31 patients (81%) had normal scores. Five patients (18%) had minor, 14 patients (50%) had borderline and 9 patients (32%) had normal AT scores. Ten patients (38%) had normal and 16 (62%) patients had PR GMs scores. Of thirty patients who had normal KANET test scores, 25 patients had AT and 8 (32%) had normal, 4 (16%) had minor and 13 (52%) had borderline scores and 23 patients had GMs and 9 (39%) had normal and 14 (61%) had PR scores. There was only one patient with an abnormal KANET test. This patient's karyotype was turned out to be Trisomy 18. Antenatal KANET and postnatal AT and GMs test results were compared and there was no significant correlation between test results. Conclusion: KANET has become a valuable functional test for identifying fetuses at high risk for various neurological impairments. Clinical Significance: In our study, KANET test results were impressive and informative. Two trisomy 18 cases who died in the first day of life had lowest KANET test scores in our cohort. Thirty three percent of cases who had borderline scores at KANET resulted in postnatal exitus. Despite these results, most cases with moderate AT and PR GMs results had good outcomes according to follow up.

HTML PDF Share
  1. Kurjak A, Miskovic B, Stanojevic M, et al. New scoring system for fetal neurobehavior assessed by three- and four-dimensional sonography. J Perinat Med 2008;36(1):73–81. DOI: 10.1515/JPM.2008.007
  2. Kurjak A, Stanojević M, Salihagić-Kadić A, et al. Is four-dimensional (4D) ultrasound entering a new field of fetal psychiatry? Psychiatr Danub 2019;31(2):133–140. DOI: 10.24869/psyd.2019.133
  3. Kurjak A, Antsaklis P, Stanojevic M, et al. Multicentric studies of the fetal neurobehavior by KANET test. J Perinat Med 2017;45(6):717–727. DOI: 10.1515/jpm-2016-0409
  4. Amiel-Tison C. Update of the Amiel-Tison neurologic assessment for the term neonate or at 40 weeks corrected age. Pediatr Neurol 2002;27(3):196–212. DOI: 10.1016/s0887-8994(02)00436-8
  5. Einspieler C, Prechtl HF. Prechtl's assessment of general movements: a diagnostic tool for the functional assessment of the young nervous system. Ment Retard Dev Disabil Res Rev 2005;11(1):61–67. DOI: 10.1002/mrdd.20051
  6. Hanaoka U, Hata T, Kanenishi K, et al. Does ethnicity have an effect on fetal behavior? A comparison of Asian and Caucasian populations. J Perinat Med 2016;44(2):217–221. DOI: 10.1515/jpm-2015-0036
  7. Hata T, Hanaoka U, Mostafa AboEllail MA, et al. Is there a sex difference in fetal behavior? A comparison of the KANET test between male and female fetuses. J Perinat Med 2016;44(5):585–588. DOI: 10.1515/jpm-2015-0387.
  8. Antsaklis P, Porovic S, Daskalakis G, et al. 4D assessment of fetal brain function in diabetic patients. J Perinat Med 2017;45(6):711–715. DOI: 10.1515/jpm-2016-0394.
  9. Gosselin J, Gahagan S, Amiel-Tison C. The Amiel-Tison Neurological Assessment at Term: conceptual and methodological continuity in the course of follow-up. Ment Retard Dev Disabil Res Rev 2005;11(1):34–51. DOI: 10.1002/mrdd.20049.
  10. Leroux BG, N'guyen The Tich S, Branger B, et al. Neurological assessment of preterm infants for predicting neuromotor status at 2 years: results from the LIFT cohort. BMJ Open 2013;3(2):e002431. DOI: 10.1136/bmjopen-2012-002431
  11. Hopkins B, Prechtl HFR. A qualitative approach to the development of movements duringearly infancy. In: Prechtl HFR, editor. Continuity of neuralfunctions form prenatal topostnatal life. Clin Dev Med No. 94. Oxford: Blackwell Scientific Publications; 1984. p. 179–97.
  12. Hadders-Algra M, Prechtl HF. Developmental course of general movements in early infancy. I. Descriptive analysis of change in form. Early Hum Dev 1992;28(3):201–213. DOI: 10.1016/0378-3782(92)90167-f
  13. Burger M, Louw QA. The predictive validity of general movements–a systematic review. Eur J Paediatr Neurol 2009;13(5):408–420. DOI: 10.1016/j.ejpn.2008.09.004
  14. Hadders-Algra M. General movements in early infancy: what do they tell us about the nervous system? Early Hum Dev 1993;34(1–2):29–37. DOI: 10.1016/0378-3782(93)90038-v
  15. Girolami Gay L, Campbell Suzann K. Efficacy of a neuro-developmental treatment program to improve motor control in infants born prematurely. Pediatric Phys Ther 1994;6(4):175–184.
  16. Prechtl HF, Einspieler C, Cioni G, et al. An early marker for neurological deficits after perinatal brain lesions. Lancet 1997;349(9062):1361–1363. DOI: 10.1016/S0140-6736(96)10182-3
  17. Einspieler C, Prechtl HF, Ferrari F, et al. The qualitative assessment of general movements in preterm, term and young infants–review of the methodology. Early Hum Dev 1997;50(1):47–60. DOI: 10.1016/s0378-3782(97)00092-3
  18. Yigiter AB, Kavak ZN. Normal standards of fetal behavior assessed by four-dimensional sonography. J Matern Fetal Neonatal Med 2006;19(11):707–721. DOI: 10.1080/14767050600924129
  19. Rees S, Harding R. Brain development during fetal life: influences of the intra-uterine environment. Neurosci Lett 2004;361(1–3):111–114. DOI: 10.1016/j.neulet.2004.02.002
  20. Joseph R. Fetal brain and cognitive development. Dev Rev 1999;20(1):81–98. DOI: 10.1006/drev.1999.0486
  21. Kurjak A, Carrera JM, Stanojevic M, et al. The role of 4D sonography in the neurological assessment of early human development. Ultrasound Rev Obstet Gynecol. 2004;4:148–159. DOI: 10.3109/14722240400017075
  22. Antsaklis P, Antsaklis A. The assessment of fetal neurobehavior with four-dimensional ultrasound: the Kurjak antenatal neurodevelopmental test. Donald School J Ultrasound Obstet Gynecol 2012;6(4):362–375. DOI: 10.5005/jp-journals-10009-1259
  23. Arias E, MacDorman MF, Strobino DM, et al. Annual summary of vital statistics–2002. Pediatrics 2003;112(6 Pt 1):1215–1230. DOI: 10.1542/peds.112.6.1215.
  24. Guyer B, MacDorman MF, Martin JA, et al. Annual summary of vital statistics–1997. Pediatrics 1998;102(6):1333–1349. DOI: 10.1542/peds.102.6.1333
  25. Shillingford AJ, Ittenbach RF, Marino BS, et al. Aortic morphometry and microcephaly in hypoplastic left heart syndrome. Cardiol Young 2007;17(2):189–195. DOI: 10.1017/S1047951107000248
  26. Manzar S, Nair AK, Pai MG, et al. Head size at birth in neonates with transposition of great arteries and hypoplastic left heart syndrome. Saudi Med J 2005;26(3):453–456.
  27. Kaltman JR, Di H, Tian Z, et al. Impact of congenital heart disease on cerebrovascular blood flow dynamics in the fetus. Ultrasound Obstet Gynecol 2005;25(1):32–36. DOI: 10.1002/uog.1785
  28. Jouannic JM, Benachi A, Bonnet D, et al. Middle cerebral artery Doppler in fetuses with transposition of the great arteries. Ultrasound Obstet Gynecol 2002;20(2):122–124. DOI: 10.1046/j.1469-0705.2002.00756.x
  29. Dubowitz L, Mercuri E, Dubowitz V. An optimality score for the neurologic examination of the term newborn. J Pediatr 1998;133(3):406–416. DOI: 10.1016/s0022-3476(98)70279-3
  30. Mercuri E, Guzzetta A, Laroche S, et al. Neurologic examination of preterm infants at term age: comparison with term infants. J Pediatr 2003;142(6):647–655. DOI: 10.1067/mpd.2003.215
PDF Share
PDF Share

© Jaypee Brothers Medical Publishers (P) LTD.