Sanchez, ThomasMihailov, AngelineKoob, MériamGirard, NadineManchon, AurélieValenzuela, IgnacioGómez-Chiari, MartaMartí Juan, GerardPron, AlexandreEixarch, ElisendaPiella Fenoy, GemmaGonzález Ballester, Miguel Ángel, 1973-Camara, OscarDunet, VincentAuzias, GuillaumeBach Cuadra, Meritxell2025-10-212025-10-212025Sanchez T, Mihailov A, Koob M, Girard N, Manchon A, Valenzuela I, et al. Biometry and volumetry in multi-centric fetal brain magnetic resonance imaging: assessing the bias of super-resolution reconstruction. Pediatr Radiol. 2025 Aug 8;55(10):2064-75. DOI: 10.1007/s00247-025-06347-71432-1998http://hdl.handle.net/10230/71591Background: Fetal brain MRI is increasingly used to complement ultrasound imaging. Images are processed using complex super-resolution reconstruction pipelines, which may bias biometric and volumetric measurements. Objective: To assess the consistency of 2-dimensional (D) biometric and 3-D volumetric measurements across three hospitals using three widely used super-resolution reconstruction pipelines. Materials and methods: This retrospective multi-centric study used T2-weighted fetal brain MRI scans acquired at three hospitals between 2009 and 2023. MRIs from each subject were reconstructed with each super-resolution reconstruction method, and biometric measurements were performed by four experts. Automated 3-D volumetry was performed using a state-of-the-art segmentation method. A qualitative evaluation assessed the clinicians’ likelihood of using super-resolution reconstructed volumes in their practice. Results: Eighty-four healthy subjects were included. Biometric measurements revealed statistically significant changes that consistently remained below voxel width (0.8 mm; P<0.001). Automated 3-D volumetry revealed small systematic effects (<2.8%; P<0.001). The qualitative evaluation showed systematic differences between super-resolution reconstruction methods for the perception of white matter intensity (P=0.02) and sharpness of the image (P=0.01). Conclusion: Variations in 2-D and 3-D quantitative measurements did not show any large systematic bias when using different super-resolution reconstruction methods for clinical radiological assessment across centers, scanners, and raters.application/pdfengThis article is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License, which permits use, sharing, adaptation, distribution and reproduction in any medium or format, as long as you give appropriate credit to the original author(s) and the source, provide a link to the Creative Commons licence, and indicate if changes were made. The images or other third party material in this article are included in the article's Creative Commons licence, unless indicated otherwise in a credit line to the material. If material is not included in the article's Creative Commons licence and your intended use is not permitted by statutory regulation or exceeds the permitted use, you will need to obtain permission directly from the copyright holder. To view a copy of this licence, visit http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/.info:eu-repo/semantics/articlehttp://dx.doi.org/10.1007/s00247-025-06347-7BiasBiometryFetal brain MRIReproducibilitySuper-resolution reconstructioninfo:eu-repo/semantics/openAccess