Related Experiment Video
Updated: Oct 23, 2025
High Frequency Ultrasound for the Analysis of Fetal and Placental Development In Vivo
Published on: November 8, 2018
Analysis of maturation features in fetal brain ultrasound via artificial intelligence for the estimation of
Xavier P Burgos-Artizzu1, David Coronado-Gutiérrez1, Brenda Valenzuela-Alcaraz2
1Transmural Biotech S.L., Barcelona, Spain (Dr Burgos-Artizzu and Mr Coronado-Gutiérrez); BCNatal, Barcelona Center for Maternal-Fetal and Neonatal Medicine, Fetal Medicine Research Center (Hospital Clínic and Hospital Sant Joan de Déu), Institut D'Investigacions Biomèdiques August Pi i Sunyer, University of Barcelona, Barcelona, Spain (Dr Burgos-Artizzu, Mr Coronado-Gutiérrez, and Drs Valenzuela-Alcaraz, Vellvé, Eixarch, Crispi, Bonet-Carne, Bennasar, and Gratacos).
Background:
Optimal prenatal care relies on accurate gestational age dating. After the first trimester, the accuracy of current gestational age estimation methods diminishes with increasing gestational age. Considering that, in many countries, access to first trimester crown rump length is still difficult owing to late booking, infrequent access to prenatal care, and unavailability of early ultrasound examination, the development of accurate methods for gestational age estimation in the second and third trimester of pregnancy remains an unsolved challenge in fetal medicine.
Objective:
This study aimed to evaluate the performance of an artificial intelligence method based on automated analysis of fetal brain morphology on standard cranial ultrasound sections to estimate the gestational age in second and third trimester fetuses compared with the current formulas using standard fetal biometry.
Study Design:
Standard transthalamic axial plane images from a total of 1394 patients undergoing routine fetal ultrasound were used to develop an artificial intelligence method to automatically estimate gestational age from the analysis of fetal brain information. We compared its performance-as stand alone or in combination with fetal biometric parameters-against 4 currently used fetal biometry formulas on a series of 3065 scans from 1992 patients undergoing second (n=1761) or third trimester (n=1298) routine ultrasound, with known gestational age estimated from crown rump length in the first trimester.
Results:
Overall, 95% confidence interval of the error in gestational age estimation was 14.2 days for the artificial intelligence method alone and 11.0 when used in combination with fetal biometric parameters, compared with 12.9 days of the best method using standard biometrics alone. In the third trimester, the lower 95% confidence interval errors were 14.3 days for artificial intelligence in combination with biometric parameters and 17 days for fetal biometrics, whereas in the second trimester, the 95% confidence interval error was 6.7 and 7, respectively. The performance differences were even larger in the small-for-gestational-age fetuses group (14.8 and 18.5, respectively).
Conclusion:
An automated artificial intelligence method using standard sonographic fetal planes yielded similar or lower error in gestational age estimation compared with fetal biometric parameters, especially in the third trimester. These results support further research to improve the performance of these methods in larger studies.
