The importance of the cerebroplacental ratio for the prognosis of neonatal outcome in AGA fetuses.
AGA
CPR
Cerebroplacental ratio
Doppler ultrasound
Neonatal outcome
Journal
Archives of gynecology and obstetrics
ISSN: 1432-0711
Titre abrégé: Arch Gynecol Obstet
Pays: Germany
ID NLM: 8710213
Informations de publication
Date de publication:
01 2023
01 2023
Historique:
received:
06
02
2022
accepted:
25
04
2022
pubmed:
23
5
2022
medline:
17
1
2023
entrez:
22
5
2022
Statut:
ppublish
Résumé
As a Doppler sonographic parameter, the cerebroplacental ratio (CPR) provides information about fetal hemodynamics and the redistribution of fetal blood volume in response to a metabolic change. The present study was undertaken to determine the extent to which CPR can be used as a valid parameter in routine obstetric assessment. We investigated whether CPR can be used to assess the neonatal outcome in appropriate for gestational age (AGA) fetuses and its association with secondary cesarean section due to fetal distress. In this retrospective analysis 1739 pregnant women were admitted to the University Women's Clinic Magdeburg, Germany, between January 2016 and December 2017. Of them, 710 AGA fetuses were eligible for analysis. SGA fetuses with an estimated fetal weight < 10th percentile were excluded from the study. The AGA fetuses were divided in two groups based on the CPR: 669 fetuses showed a normal CPR ≥ 1.08; 41 fetuses showed a decreased CPR < 1.08. In our study cohort decreased CPR in AGA fetuses was associated with threefold increased rate of cesarean sections due to fetal distress (p < 0.001). Our data suggested that low CPR is a reliable predictor of an impaired neonatal outcome in AGA fetuses in terms of a lower birth weight, transfer to neonatology, longer length of hospitalization, and the presence of severe morbidity. Decreased CPR in AGA fetuses correlated with impaired neonatal outcome and secondary cesarean section due to fetal distress. The potential role of CPR for obstetric screening should be investigated in further studies.
Identifiants
pubmed: 35598253
doi: 10.1007/s00404-022-06596-z
pii: 10.1007/s00404-022-06596-z
pmc: PMC9837014
doi:
Types de publication
Journal Article
Research Support, Non-U.S. Gov't
Langues
eng
Sous-ensembles de citation
IM
Pagination
311-317Informations de copyright
© 2022. The Author(s).
Références
Am J Obstet Gynecol. 2019 Jul;221(1):65.e1-65.e18
pubmed: 30878322
Am J Obstet Gynecol. 2017 May;216(5):521.e1-521.e13
pubmed: 28087423
Am J Obstet Gynecol. 2015 Jul;213(1):54.e1-54.e10
pubmed: 25446667
Am J Obstet Gynecol. 1999 Mar;180(3 Pt 1):750-6
pubmed: 10076158
Am J Obstet Gynecol. 2014 Sep;211(3):288.e1-5
pubmed: 24813969
Am J Obstet Gynecol. 1985 Feb 1;151(3):333-7
pubmed: 3881966
J Ultrasound Med. 2005 Sep;24(9):1223-8
pubmed: 16123182
Am J Obstet Gynecol. 2013 Feb;208(2):124.e1-6
pubmed: 23159689
Ultrasound Obstet Gynecol. 2007 Sep;30(3):287-96
pubmed: 17721916
Ultrasound Obstet Gynecol. 2015 Mar;45(3):279-85
pubmed: 25358519
Ultrasound Med Biol. 1987 Jun;13(6):329-37
pubmed: 3303590
Ultrasound Obstet Gynecol. 2003 Feb;21(2):124-7
pubmed: 12601831
Obstet Gynecol. 1992 Mar;79(3):416-20
pubmed: 1738525
Ultraschall Med. 2021 Aug;42(4):404-410
pubmed: 32040971
Obstet Gynecol. 2011 Mar;117(3):618-626
pubmed: 21343765
Radiology. 1984 Feb;150(2):535-40
pubmed: 6691115
Am J Obstet Gynecol. 2015 Jul;213(1):5-15
pubmed: 26113227