Ductus venosus Doppler assessment: do the results differ between the sagittal and the transverse approach?

V. Seravalli, G. Masini, Ilaria Ponziani, M. Di Tommaso, L. Pasquini
{"title":"Ductus venosus Doppler assessment: do the results differ between the sagittal and the transverse approach?","authors":"V. Seravalli, G. Masini, Ilaria Ponziani, M. Di Tommaso, L. Pasquini","doi":"10.1080/14767058.2022.2050364","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"Abstract Objective To compare the ductus venosus (DV) pulsatility index for veins (PIV) obtained in a mid-sagittal plane with that obtained in an oblique transverse plane of the fetal abdomen. Methods Prospective observational study in singleton uncomplicated pregnancies undergoing an ultrasound examination between 24 and 34 weeks of gestation. Pregnancies complicated by fetal anomalies, fetal growth restriction, or oligohydramnios were excluded. Two consecutive recordings of DV Doppler waveform were obtained in each woman: one in a mid-sagittal plane, and the other in an oblique transverse plane of the fetal abdomen. The peak velocity during ventricular systole (S-wave) and diastole (D-wave), the velocity during atrial contraction (a-wave), and the time-averaged maximum velocity (TAmax) were measured, and the PIV was calculated. The paired t-test was used to compare results obtained with the two approaches. A change of the DV-PIV of 0.10 or more was considered clinically relevant. Results The DV waveform was successfully obtained in 53 women (mean gestational age 28.5 weeks). The mean DV-PIV was 0.57 (±0.16 SD) in the sagittal plane and 0.54 (±0.16 SD) in the transverse plane. The mean difference (0.03) was statistically significant (p = .04), but not clinically relevant. The sagittal S-, D-, and a-wave velocities and TAmax were significantly higher in the sagittal plane compared to the transverse plane, with an increase of 12, 8, 8, and 10%, respectively (p < .05). Conclusions The difference in the DV-PIV obtained in a mid-sagittal plane compared to a transverse plane of the fetal abdomen is small and not clinically significant. The higher DV flow velocities observed in the sagittal plane are likely the result of a better alignment with the vessel obtained using this plane. These findings have implications for clinical practice and for research.","PeriodicalId":22921,"journal":{"name":"The Journal of Maternal-Fetal & Neonatal Medicine","volume":"44 1","pages":"9661 - 9666"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2022-03-13","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"The Journal of Maternal-Fetal & Neonatal Medicine","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1080/14767058.2022.2050364","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

Abstract Objective To compare the ductus venosus (DV) pulsatility index for veins (PIV) obtained in a mid-sagittal plane with that obtained in an oblique transverse plane of the fetal abdomen. Methods Prospective observational study in singleton uncomplicated pregnancies undergoing an ultrasound examination between 24 and 34 weeks of gestation. Pregnancies complicated by fetal anomalies, fetal growth restriction, or oligohydramnios were excluded. Two consecutive recordings of DV Doppler waveform were obtained in each woman: one in a mid-sagittal plane, and the other in an oblique transverse plane of the fetal abdomen. The peak velocity during ventricular systole (S-wave) and diastole (D-wave), the velocity during atrial contraction (a-wave), and the time-averaged maximum velocity (TAmax) were measured, and the PIV was calculated. The paired t-test was used to compare results obtained with the two approaches. A change of the DV-PIV of 0.10 or more was considered clinically relevant. Results The DV waveform was successfully obtained in 53 women (mean gestational age 28.5 weeks). The mean DV-PIV was 0.57 (±0.16 SD) in the sagittal plane and 0.54 (±0.16 SD) in the transverse plane. The mean difference (0.03) was statistically significant (p = .04), but not clinically relevant. The sagittal S-, D-, and a-wave velocities and TAmax were significantly higher in the sagittal plane compared to the transverse plane, with an increase of 12, 8, 8, and 10%, respectively (p < .05). Conclusions The difference in the DV-PIV obtained in a mid-sagittal plane compared to a transverse plane of the fetal abdomen is small and not clinically significant. The higher DV flow velocities observed in the sagittal plane are likely the result of a better alignment with the vessel obtained using this plane. These findings have implications for clinical practice and for research.
查看原文
分享 分享
微信好友 朋友圈 QQ好友 复制链接
本刊更多论文
静脉导管多普勒评估:矢状入路和横入路的结果不同吗?
摘要目的比较胎儿腹部中矢状面静脉导管(DV)搏动指数与斜横切面静脉导管(PIV)搏动指数。方法对妊娠24 ~ 34周单胎无并发症孕妇行超声检查进行前瞻性观察研究。排除伴有胎儿异常、胎儿生长受限或羊水过少的妊娠。在每个妇女中获得两个连续的DV多普勒波形记录:一个在胎儿腹部的中矢状面,另一个在胎儿腹部的斜横切面。测量心室收缩期(s波)和舒张期(d波)的峰值流速,心房收缩期(a波)的峰值流速,时间平均最大流速(TAmax),并计算PIV。配对t检验用于比较两种方法得到的结果。DV-PIV变化0.10或更高被认为具有临床相关性。结果53例(平均胎龄28.5周)成功获得DV波形。矢状面DV-PIV均值为0.57(±0.16 SD),横切面均值为0.54(±0.16 SD)。平均差异(0.03)有统计学意义(p = 0.04),但无临床相关性。矢状面S波速度、D波速度、a波速度和TAmax分别比横切面增加12%、8%、8%和10% (p < 0.05)。结论胎儿腹部正中矢状面与横切面的DV-PIV差异较小,无临床意义。在矢状面上观察到的较高DV流速可能是使用该平面获得的与血管更好对齐的结果。这些发现对临床实践和研究具有启示意义。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 去求助
来源期刊
自引率
0.00%
发文量
0
期刊最新文献
The impact of specialty training and physician attitudes on fetal cardiac counseling Fetoplacental unit involvement in uric acid production in women with severe preeclampsia: a prospective case control pilot study. Causal association of sex hormone-binding globulin on gestational hypertension and pre-eclampsia: a two-sample Mendelian randomization study Targeted metabolomic analysis of early-trimester serum identifies potential mechanisms for late-onset preeclampsia Statement of retraction: effect of daily consumption of probiotic yoghurt on lipid profiles in pregnant women: a randomized controlled clinical trial
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
现在去查看 取消
×
提示
确定
0
微信
客服QQ
Book学术公众号 扫码关注我们
反馈
×
意见反馈
请填写您的意见或建议
请填写您的手机或邮箱
已复制链接
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
×
扫码分享
扫码分享
Book学术官方微信
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术
文献互助 智能选刊 最新文献 互助须知 联系我们:info@booksci.cn
Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。
Copyright © 2023 Book学术 All rights reserved.
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号 京ICP备2023020795号-1