First Trimester Prediction of Adverse Pregnancy Outcomes-Identifying Pregnancies at Risk from as Early as 11-13 Weeks.
11–13 weeks
chromosomal abnormalities
fetal growth restriction
first trimester
gestational diabetes
placenta accreta spectrum
preeclampsia
pregnancy outcomes
preterm birth
small for gestational age
structural defects
Journal
Medicina (Kaunas, Lithuania)
ISSN: 1648-9144
Titre abrégé: Medicina (Kaunas)
Pays: Switzerland
ID NLM: 9425208
Informations de publication
Date de publication:
22 Feb 2022
22 Feb 2022
Historique:
received:
25
01
2022
revised:
18
02
2022
accepted:
21
02
2022
entrez:
26
3
2022
pubmed:
27
3
2022
medline:
1
4
2022
Statut:
epublish
Résumé
There is consistent evidence that many of the pregnancy complications that occur late in the second and third trimester can be predicted from an integrated 11-13 weeks visit, where a maternal and fetal assessment are comprehensively performed. The traditional aims of the 11-13 weeks visit have been: establishing fetal viability, chorionicity and dating of the pregnancy, and performing the combined screening test for common chromosomal abnormalities. Recent studies have shown that the first trimester provides important information that may help to predict pregnancy complications, such as preeclampsia and fetal growth restriction, stillbirth, preterm birth, gestational diabetes mellitus and placenta accreta spectrum disorder. The aim of this manuscript is to review the methods available to identify pregnancies at risk for adverse outcomes after screening at 11-13 weeks. Effective screening in the first trimester improves pregnancy outcomes by allowing specific interventions such as administering aspirin and directing patients to specialist clinics for regular monitoring.
Identifiants
pubmed: 35334508
pii: medicina58030332
doi: 10.3390/medicina58030332
pmc: PMC8951779
pii:
doi:
Types de publication
Journal Article
Review
Langues
eng
Sous-ensembles de citation
IM
Références
Diabetes. 2010 Dec;59(12):3017-22
pubmed: 20876721
Ultrasound Obstet Gynecol. 2019 Jan;53(1):101-106
pubmed: 30199114
Ultrasound Obstet Gynecol. 2018 Jul;52(1):52-59
pubmed: 29704277
N Engl J Med. 2017 Aug 17;377(7):613-622
pubmed: 28657417
Fetal Diagn Ther. 2015;38(1):14-21
pubmed: 25531073
Ultrasound Obstet Gynecol. 2009 Mar;33(3):259-64
pubmed: 19248005
Ultrasound Obstet Gynecol. 2016 Nov;48(5):613-617
pubmed: 27561595
Ultrasound Obstet Gynecol. 2018 Feb;51(2):169-175
pubmed: 28661021
Ultrasound Obstet Gynecol. 2016 Nov;48(5):618-623
pubmed: 27854388
Fetal Diagn Ther. 2011;29(3):183-96
pubmed: 21389681
Am J Obstet Gynecol. 2020 Jul;223(1):12-23.e7
pubmed: 31733203
Ultrasound Obstet Gynecol. 2020 Sep;56(3):400-407
pubmed: 32441401
Prenat Diagn. 2011 Jan;31(1):75-83
pubmed: 21210482
Ultrasound Obstet Gynecol. 2022 Jan;59(1):61-68
pubmed: 34643306
N Engl J Med. 2007 Aug 2;357(5):462-9
pubmed: 17671254
Ultrasound Obstet Gynecol. 2006 Oct;28(5):637-43
pubmed: 16952214
Clin Chem. 2011 Apr;57(4):609-13
pubmed: 21325104
Prenat Diagn. 2011 Feb;31(2):135-41
pubmed: 21268030
Fetal Diagn Ther. 2012;31(3):154-61
pubmed: 22399065
Ultrasound Obstet Gynecol. 2009 May;33(5):512-7
pubmed: 19338027
Ultrasound Obstet Gynecol. 2009 Jan;33(1):18-22
pubmed: 19031473
Ultrasound Obstet Gynecol. 2021 Mar;57(3):392-400
pubmed: 32936500
Ultrasound Obstet Gynecol. 2018 Jun;51(6):743-750
pubmed: 29536574
Ultrasound Obstet Gynecol. 2021 Jan;57(1):52-61
pubmed: 33094535
Ultrasound Obstet Gynecol. 2010 Oct;36(4):404-11
pubmed: 20658511
Ultrasound Obstet Gynecol. 2019 Oct;54(4):468-476
pubmed: 31408229