Predicting neonatal mortality prior to discharge from hospital in prenatally diagnosed left congenital diaphragmatic hernia
Bibliographic record
Abstract
OBJECTIVES: To evaluate the association of standardized prenatal imaging parameters and immediate neonatal variables with mortality prior to discharge in infants with isolated left congenital diaphragmatic hernia (LCDH), and to compare the performance of ultrasound- and magnetic resonance imaging (MRI)-based severity grading for the prediction of neonatal mortality. METHODS: This was a retrospective study of infants with prenatally diagnosed isolated LCDH referred to a single tertiary center between 2008 and 2020. Fetuses with right or bilateral congenital diaphragmatic hernia, additional major structural anomaly or known genetic condition, as well as cases that underwent fetal intervention or declined postnatal intervention, were excluded. Ultrasound and MRI images were reviewed retrospectively. Univariable and multivariable analyses were performed, incorporating prenatal and immediate neonatal factors to analyze the association with neonatal mortality prior to discharge, and a prediction calculator was generated. The performance of ultrasound and that of MRI for the prediction of neonatal mortality were compared. RESULTS: Of 253 pregnancies with fetal CDH, 104 met the inclusion criteria, of whom 77 (74%) neonates survived to discharge. Seventy-five fetuses underwent both prenatal ultrasound and MRI. On multivariable analysis, observed/expected (o/e) lung-to-head ratio and o/e total fetal lung volume were associated independently with neonatal death (adjusted odds ratio, 0.89 (95% CI, 0.83-0.95) and 0.90 (95% CI, 0.84-0.97), respectively), whereas liver position was not. There was no significant difference in predictive performance between using ultrasound and MRI together (area under the receiver-operating-characteristics curve (AUC), 0.85 (95% CI, 0.76-0.93)) compared with using ultrasound alone (AUC, 0.81 (95% CI, 0.72-0.90); P = 0.19). The addition of neonatal parameters (gestational age at birth and small-for-gestational age) did not improve model performance (AUC, 0.87 (95% CI, 0.80-0.95)) compared with the combined ultrasound and MRI model (P = 0.22). There was poor agreement between severity assessment on ultrasound and MRI (Cohen's κ, 0.19). Most discrepancies were seen among cases deemed to be non-severe on ultrasound and severe on MRI, and outcomes were more consistent with MRI-based prognostication. CONCLUSIONS: In fetuses with prenatally diagnosed isolated LCDH, mortality prediction using standardized ultrasound and MRI measurements performed reasonably well. In cases classified as non-severe on ultrasound, MRI is recommended, as it may provide more accurate prognostication and assist in the determination of candidacy for fetal intervention. © 2024 The Author(s). Ultrasound in Obstetrics & Gynecology published by John Wiley & Sons Ltd on behalf of International Society of Ultrasound in Obstetrics and Gynecology.
Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.
How this classification was reachedexpand
Full frame machine prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.001 | 0.008 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
Machine scores (provisional)
The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.
Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.
How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".