Megacystis in the first trimester of pregnancy: Prognostic factors and perinatal outcomes.
Adult
Duodenum
/ abnormalities
Female
Fetal Diseases
/ diagnostic imaging
Gestational Age
Humans
Infant, Newborn
Karyotyping
Pregnancy
Pregnancy Outcome
Pregnancy Trimester, First
Prenatal Diagnosis
/ methods
Prognosis
ROC Curve
Retrospective Studies
Survival Rate
Ultrasonography, Prenatal
/ methods
Urinary Bladder
/ abnormalities
Journal
PloS one
ISSN: 1932-6203
Titre abrégé: PLoS One
Pays: United States
ID NLM: 101285081
Informations de publication
Date de publication:
2021
2021
Historique:
received:
18
12
2020
accepted:
26
07
2021
entrez:
7
9
2021
pubmed:
8
9
2021
medline:
15
12
2021
Statut:
epublish
Résumé
To determine whether bladder size is associated with an unfavorable neonatal outcome, in the case of first-trimester megacystis. This was a retrospective observational study between 2009 and 2019 in two prenatal diagnosis centers. The inclusion criterion was an enlarged bladder (> 7 mm) diagnosed at the first ultrasound exam between 11 and 13+6 weeks of gestation. The main study endpoint was neonatal outcome based on bladder size. An adverse outcome was defined by the completion of a medical termination of pregnancy, the occurrence of in utero fetal death, or a neonatal death. Neonatal survival was considered as a favorable outcome and was defined by a live birth, with or without normal renal function, and with a normal karyotype. Among 75 cases of first-trimester megacystis referred to prenatal diagnosis centers and included, there were 63 (84%) adverse outcomes and 12 (16%) live births. Fetuses with a bladder diameter of less than 12.5 mm may have a favorable outcome, with or without urological problems, with a high sensitivity (83.3%) and specificity (87.3%), area under the ROC curve = 0.93, 95% CI (0.86-0.99), p< 0.001. Fetal autopsy was performed in 52 (82.5%) cases of adverse outcome. In the 12 cases of favorable outcome, pediatric follow-up was normal and non-pathological in 8 (66.7%). Bladder diameter appears to be a predictive marker for neonatal outcome. Fetuses with smaller megacystis (7-10 mm) have a significantly higher chance of progressing to a favorable outcome. Urethral stenosis and atresia are the main diagnoses made when first-trimester megacystis is observed. Karyotyping is important regardless of bladder diameter.
Identifiants
pubmed: 34492029
doi: 10.1371/journal.pone.0255890
pii: PONE-D-20-39804
pmc: PMC8423287
doi:
Types de publication
Journal Article
Observational Study
Langues
eng
Sous-ensembles de citation
IM
Pagination
e0255890Déclaration de conflit d'intérêts
The authors have declared that no competing interests exist.
Références
Ultrasound Obstet Gynecol. 2017 Oct;50(4):458-463
pubmed: 28133847
Ultrasound Obstet Gynecol. 2017 Feb;49(2):224-230
pubmed: 26799640
Clin Exp Obstet Gynecol. 2016;43(4):612-613
pubmed: 29734561
Prenat Diagn. 2004 Feb;24(2):144-9
pubmed: 14974124
ANZ J Surg. 2011 Jul-Aug;81(7-8):552-5
pubmed: 22295387
Prenat Diagn. 2016 Dec;36(13):1206-1210
pubmed: 27862070
J Pediatr Urol. 2016 Oct;12(5):296-303
pubmed: 27570093
Prenat Diagn. 2013 Dec;33(12):1162-6
pubmed: 23939878
Prenat Diagn. 2011 Jan;31(1):90-102
pubmed: 21210483
J Ultrasound Med. 2015 Aug;34(8):1423-8
pubmed: 26206828
Prenat Diagn. 2003 Apr;23(4):340-4
pubmed: 12673643
J Perinat Med. 2018 Nov 27;46(9):1035-1039
pubmed: 29369818
Am J Obstet Gynecol. 2004 Oct;191(4):1247-52
pubmed: 15507948
Fetal Diagn Ther. 2016;39(2):152-7
pubmed: 26645214
Ultrasound Obstet Gynecol. 2019 Jun;53(6):779-787
pubmed: 30043466
Ultrasound Obstet Gynecol. 2017 Oct;50(4):429-441
pubmed: 27546497
Clin Case Rep. 2018 Mar 12;6(5):855-858
pubmed: 29744072
Ultrasound Obstet Gynecol. 2019 Apr;53(4):520-524
pubmed: 29978555
Ultrasound Obstet Gynecol. 2020 Jul;56(1):86-95
pubmed: 31006924
Ultrasound Obstet Gynecol. 2013 Mar;41(3):345-7
pubmed: 23243015
Prenat Diagn. 2016 Apr;36(4):297-303
pubmed: 26739350
Pediatr Nephrol. 2020 Jul;35(7):1193-1201
pubmed: 31197474
Ultrasound Obstet Gynecol. 2010 Jul;36(1):10-4
pubmed: 20564304
Fetal Diagn Ther. 2019;45(3):155-161
pubmed: 29772579
Prenat Diagn. 2021 Feb;41(3):308-315
pubmed: 33219696
J Pediatr Urol. 2017 Feb;13(1):7-15
pubmed: 27889224
Ultrasound Obstet Gynecol. 2005 May;25(5):478-82
pubmed: 15816021
Ultrasound Obstet Gynecol. 2018 Dec;52(6):739-743
pubmed: 29266464
Gynecol Obstet Fertil Senol. 2017 Jun;45(6):373-380
pubmed: 28552751
Ultrasound Obstet Gynecol. 1999 Dec;14(6):402-6
pubmed: 10658279
Fetal Diagn Ther. 2017;42(4):271-277
pubmed: 28399525
Ultrasound Obstet Gynecol. 2015 Feb;45(2):183-9
pubmed: 24817027
Clin Perinatol. 2014 Sep;41(3):643-59
pubmed: 25155733
Genet Med. 2011 Nov;13(11):913-20
pubmed: 22005709
Gynecol Obstet Fertil. 2009 Feb;37(2):115-24
pubmed: 19200766
Am J Obstet Gynecol. 2012 Apr;206(4):322.e1-5
pubmed: 22464073
Arch Gynecol Obstet. 2013 Feb;287(2):187-94
pubmed: 23138754
Urology. 2014 Jul;84(1):185-90
pubmed: 24745800
Gynecol Obstet Fertil. 2016 Jan;44(1):43-55
pubmed: 26655060
J Gynecol Obstet Biol Reprod (Paris). 2016 Jun;45(6):633-40
pubmed: 26518155
Kidney Int. 1997 Jul;52(1):21-32
pubmed: 9211342