Introducing and Validating the Cranial-Dorsal-Hip Angle (∠CDH): A Method for Accurate Fetal Position Assessment in the First Trimester and Future AI Applications

Abstract

Purpose To introduce the cranial-dorsal-hip angle (∠CDH) as a novel quantitative tool for assessing fetal position in the first trimester and to validate its feasibility for future AI applications.

Materials and Methods 2520 first-trimester fetal NT exams with 2582 CRL images (January-August 2022) were analyzed at a tertiary hospital as the pilot group. Additionally, 1418 cases with 1450 fetal CRL images (September-December 2022) were examined for validation. Three expert sonographers defined a standard for fetal positions. ∠CDH measurements, conducted by two ultrasound technicians, were validated for consistency using Bland-Altman plots and the intra-class correlation coefficient (ICC). This method allowed for categorizing fetal positions as hyperflexion, neutral, and hyperextension based on ∠CDH. Comparative accuracy was assessed against Ioannou, Wanyonyi, and Roux methods using the weighted Kappa coefficient (k value).

Results The pilot group comprised 2186 fetal CRL images, and the validation group included 1193 images. Measurement consistency was high (ICCs of 0.993; P<0.001). The established 95% reference range for ∠CDH in the neutral fetal position was 118.3° to 137.8°. The ∠CDH method demonstrated superior accuracy over the Ioannou, Wanyonyi, and Roux methods in both groups, with accuracy rates of 94.5% (k values: 0.874, 95%CI: 0.852–0.896) in the pilot group, and 92.6% (k values: 0.838, 95%CI: 0.806–0.871) in the validation group.

Conclusion The ∠CDH method has been validated as a highly reproducible and accurate technique for first-trimester fetal position assessment. This sets the stage for its potential future integration into intelligent assessment models.

Keywords

obstetrics - ultrasound - fetus

Publication History

Received: 29 February 2024

Accepted: 28 May 2024

Article published online:
24 June 2024

• References

• 1 Napolitano R, Dhami J, Ohuma EO. et al. Pregnancy dating by fetal crown-rump length: a systematic review of charts. BJOG 2014; 121: 556-565
• 2 Papageorghiou AT, Kennedy SH, Salomon LJ. et al. International standards for early fetal size and pregnancy dating based on ultrasound measurement of crown-rump length in the first trimester of pregnancy. Ultrasound Obstet Gynecol 2014; 44: 641-648
• 3 Sagi-Dain L, Peleg A, Sagi S. First-Trimester Crown-Rump Length and Risk of Chromosomal Aberrations-A Systematic Review and Meta-analysis. Obstetrical & gynecological survey 2017; 72: 603-609
• 4 Kagan KO, Hoopmann M, Baker A. et al. Impact of bias in crown-rump length measurement at first-trimester screening for trisomy 21. Ultrasound Obstet Gynecol 2012; 40: 135-139
• 5 Salomon LJ, Bernard M, Amarsy R. et al. The impact of crown-rump length measurement error on combined Down syndrome screening: a simulation study. Ultrasound Obstet Gynecol 2009; 33: 506-511
• 6 Gadsboll K, Wright A, Kristensen SE. et al. Crown-rump length measurement error: impact on assessment of growth. Ultrasound Obstet Gynecol 2021; 58: 354-359
• 7 Stirnemann J, Massoud M, Fries N. et al. Crown-rump length measurement: a new age for first-trimester ultrasound?. Ultrasound Obstet Gynecol 2021; 58: 345-346
• 8 Patel S, Sarkar A, Pushpalatha K. A Prospective Study on Correlation of First Trimester Crown-Rump Length With Birth Weight. Cureus 2022; 14: e28781
• 9 Xu Y, Ni M, Zhang Q. et al. Correlation between crown-rump length in the first trimester of pregnancy and neonatal outcomes. BMC pediatrics 2022; 22: 386
• 10 Jakubowski D, Salloum D, Torbe A. et al. The crown-rump length measurement - ISUOG criteria and clinical practice. Ginekol Pol 2020; 91: 674-678
• 11 Dhombres F, Roux N, Friszer S. et al. Relation between the quality of the ultrasound image acquisition and the precision of the measurement of the crown-rump length in the late first trimester: what are the consequences?. European journal of obstetrics, gynecology, and reproductive biology 2016; 207: 37-44
• 12 Fries N, Althuser M, Fontanges M. et al. Quality control of an image-scoring method for nuchal translucency ultrasonography. Am J Obstet Gynecol 2007; 196: 272 e271-272 e275
• 13 Salomon LJ, Alfirevic Z, Bilardo CM. et al. ISUOG practice guidelines: performance of first-trimester fetal ultrasound scan. Ultrasound Obstet Gynecol 2013; 41: 102-113
• 14 Ioannou C, Sarris I, Hoch L. et al Standardisation of crown-rump length measurement. BJOG 2013; 120 Suppl 2: 38-41 v
• 15 Wanyonyi SZ, Napolitano R, Ohuma EO. et al. Image-scoring system for crown-rump length measurement. Ultrasound Obstet Gynecol 2014; 44: 649-654
• 16 Roux N, Dhombres F, Friszer S. et al. How to assess the neutral position of the fetus for the crown-rump length measurement at the nuchal translucency scan. Gynecol Obstet Fertil 2016; 44: 146-150
• 17 Yang C, Yang Z, Liao S. et al. A new approach to automatic measure fetal head circumference in ultrasound images using convolutional neural networks. Comput Biol Med 2022; 147: 105801
• 18 Jang J, Park Y, Kim B. et al. Automatic Estimation of Fetal Abdominal Circumference From Ultrasound Images. IEEE J Biomed Health Inform 2018; 22: 1512-1520
• 19 Luo D, Wen H, Peng G. et al. A Prenatal Ultrasound Scanning Approach: One-Touch Technique in Second and Third Trimesters. Ultrasound Med Biol 2021; 47: 2258-2265
• 20 Yasrab R, Fu Z, Drukker L. et al. End-to-end First Trimester Fetal Ultrasound Video Automated CRL and NT Segmentation. Proc IEEE Int Symp Biomed Imaging 2022; 2022: 9761400
• 21 Cengiz S, Yaqub M. Automatic Fetal Gestational Age Estimation from First Trimester Scans. In: Simplifying Medical Ultrasound. 2021: 220-227
• 22 Staboulidou I, Wüstemann M, Vaske B. et al. Interobserver variability of the measurement of fetal nasal bone length between 11+0 and 13+6 gestation weeks among experienced and inexperienced sonographers. Ultraschall in Med 2009; 30: 42-46
• 23 Salomon LJ, Bernard JP, Duyme M. et al. Feasibility and reproducibility of an image-scoring method for quality control of fetal biometry in the second trimester. Ultrasound Obstet Gynecol 2006; 27: 34-40
• 24 Dhombres F, Khoshnood B, Bessis R. et al. Quality of first-trimester measurement of crown-rump length. Am J Obstet Gynecol 2014; 211: 672 e671-672 e675