扩大胎儿生长受限的定义后,发现脐动脉多普勒异常的比例很高。

IF 1.5 4区 医学 Q3 OBSTETRICS & GYNECOLOGY American journal of perinatology Pub Date : 2024-10-29 DOI:10.1055/a-2435-0468
Angela Nakahra, Miranda Long, Ardem Elmayan, Joseph R Biggio, Frank B Williams
{"title":"扩大胎儿生长受限的定义后,发现脐动脉多普勒异常的比例很高。","authors":"Angela Nakahra, Miranda Long, Ardem Elmayan, Joseph R Biggio, Frank B Williams","doi":"10.1055/a-2435-0468","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Objective: </strong> Fetal growth restriction (FGR) increases the risk for perinatal morbidity and mortality. The Society for Maternal-Fetal Medicine expanded the definition of FGR to independently include abdominal circumference (AC) < 10th percentile for gestational age (GA), regardless of estimated fetal weight (EFW). While studies have shown increased detection of small for GA neonates with expanded definition, no studies have evaluated the likelihood of abnormal umbilical artery Dopplers (UAD) detection with expanded definition. The objective of this study was to compare the likelihood of identifying UAD abnormalities in fetuses with normal EFW and restricted AC versus those by EFW alone.</p><p><strong>Study design: </strong> Single-institution retrospective cohort study of fetal growth ultrasounds meeting criteria for FGR either by EFW < 10th percentile or AC < 10th percentile with normal EFW. Those with FGR by AC alone were compared with those with FGR by EFW. Primary outcome was prevalence of UAD abnormalities, including elevated systolic/diastolic ratio, and absent and/or reversed end diastolic velocity. Receiver operator characteristic curves were generated to compare predictive value of UAD abnormalities by FGR definition.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong> A total of 619 scans met criteria for FGR between November 2020 and June 2021, with 441 (71%) meeting definition by EFW and 178 (29%) by AC criteria alone. Baseline characteristics were similar between groups. FGR by AC alone was identified earlier (30.4 ± 3.3 vs. 35.4 ± 3.0 weeks' gestation, <i>p</i> < 0.001) with higher proportion identified before 32 weeks (70 vs. 11%, <i>p</i> < 0.001). Proportion of abnormal UAD were similar between groups (15 vs. 15%, adjusted odds ratio: 1.12, 95% confidence interval: 0.61-2.23). Use of EFW alone would have failed to identify 29% of abnormal UAD. A combined definition of FGR had the highest detection of abnormal UAD (area under curve: 0.78 vs. AC alone 0.73 vs. EFW alone 0.69).</p><p><strong>Conclusion: </strong> A definition of FGR that considers both EFW and AC improves detection of abnormal UAD.</p><p><strong>Key points: </strong>· Fetuses with restricted AC are equally likely to exhibit abnormal UAD indices compared with those that meet criteria by EFW.. · Earlier GA of FGR detection and improved detection of abnormal UAD with expanded growth definition.. · Expanded definition of FGR significantly improves detection of abnormal UAD as compared with those diagnosed with EFW criteria alone.. · Expanded growth restriction definition improves Doppler identification..</p>","PeriodicalId":7584,"journal":{"name":"American journal of perinatology","volume":" ","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":1.5000,"publicationDate":"2024-10-29","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Expanded Fetal Growth Restriction Definition Identifies High Proportion of Umbilical Artery Doppler Anomalies.\",\"authors\":\"Angela Nakahra, Miranda Long, Ardem Elmayan, Joseph R Biggio, Frank B Williams\",\"doi\":\"10.1055/a-2435-0468\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"<p><strong>Objective: </strong> Fetal growth restriction (FGR) increases the risk for perinatal morbidity and mortality. The Society for Maternal-Fetal Medicine expanded the definition of FGR to independently include abdominal circumference (AC) < 10th percentile for gestational age (GA), regardless of estimated fetal weight (EFW). While studies have shown increased detection of small for GA neonates with expanded definition, no studies have evaluated the likelihood of abnormal umbilical artery Dopplers (UAD) detection with expanded definition. The objective of this study was to compare the likelihood of identifying UAD abnormalities in fetuses with normal EFW and restricted AC versus those by EFW alone.</p><p><strong>Study design: </strong> Single-institution retrospective cohort study of fetal growth ultrasounds meeting criteria for FGR either by EFW < 10th percentile or AC < 10th percentile with normal EFW. Those with FGR by AC alone were compared with those with FGR by EFW. Primary outcome was prevalence of UAD abnormalities, including elevated systolic/diastolic ratio, and absent and/or reversed end diastolic velocity. Receiver operator characteristic curves were generated to compare predictive value of UAD abnormalities by FGR definition.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong> A total of 619 scans met criteria for FGR between November 2020 and June 2021, with 441 (71%) meeting definition by EFW and 178 (29%) by AC criteria alone. Baseline characteristics were similar between groups. FGR by AC alone was identified earlier (30.4 ± 3.3 vs. 35.4 ± 3.0 weeks' gestation, <i>p</i> < 0.001) with higher proportion identified before 32 weeks (70 vs. 11%, <i>p</i> < 0.001). Proportion of abnormal UAD were similar between groups (15 vs. 15%, adjusted odds ratio: 1.12, 95% confidence interval: 0.61-2.23). Use of EFW alone would have failed to identify 29% of abnormal UAD. A combined definition of FGR had the highest detection of abnormal UAD (area under curve: 0.78 vs. AC alone 0.73 vs. EFW alone 0.69).</p><p><strong>Conclusion: </strong> A definition of FGR that considers both EFW and AC improves detection of abnormal UAD.</p><p><strong>Key points: </strong>· Fetuses with restricted AC are equally likely to exhibit abnormal UAD indices compared with those that meet criteria by EFW.. · Earlier GA of FGR detection and improved detection of abnormal UAD with expanded growth definition.. · Expanded definition of FGR significantly improves detection of abnormal UAD as compared with those diagnosed with EFW criteria alone.. · Expanded growth restriction definition improves Doppler identification..</p>\",\"PeriodicalId\":7584,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"American journal of perinatology\",\"volume\":\" \",\"pages\":\"\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":1.5000,\"publicationDate\":\"2024-10-29\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"American journal of perinatology\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"3\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.1055/a-2435-0468\",\"RegionNum\":4,\"RegionCategory\":\"医学\",\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"Q3\",\"JCRName\":\"OBSTETRICS & GYNECOLOGY\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"American journal of perinatology","FirstCategoryId":"3","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1055/a-2435-0468","RegionNum":4,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q3","JCRName":"OBSTETRICS & GYNECOLOGY","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

摘要

目的:胎儿生长受限(FGR)会增加围产期发病率和死亡率。母胎医学会扩大了 FGR 的定义,将腹围(AC)独立纳入其中 研究设计:单机构回顾性队列研究,通过EFW对符合FGR标准的胎儿生长超声检查结果进行分析:2020年11月至2021年6月期间,有619例扫描符合FGR标准,其中441例(71%)符合EFW定义,178例(29%)仅符合AC标准。两组的基线特征相似。仅根据 AC 标准确定的 FGR 更早(妊娠 30.4 ±3.3 周 vs 35.4 ±3.0 周,P 结论:同时考虑 EFW 和 AC 的 FGR 定义可提高对异常 UAD 的检出率。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
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
Expanded Fetal Growth Restriction Definition Identifies High Proportion of Umbilical Artery Doppler Anomalies.

Objective:  Fetal growth restriction (FGR) increases the risk for perinatal morbidity and mortality. The Society for Maternal-Fetal Medicine expanded the definition of FGR to independently include abdominal circumference (AC) < 10th percentile for gestational age (GA), regardless of estimated fetal weight (EFW). While studies have shown increased detection of small for GA neonates with expanded definition, no studies have evaluated the likelihood of abnormal umbilical artery Dopplers (UAD) detection with expanded definition. The objective of this study was to compare the likelihood of identifying UAD abnormalities in fetuses with normal EFW and restricted AC versus those by EFW alone.

Study design:  Single-institution retrospective cohort study of fetal growth ultrasounds meeting criteria for FGR either by EFW < 10th percentile or AC < 10th percentile with normal EFW. Those with FGR by AC alone were compared with those with FGR by EFW. Primary outcome was prevalence of UAD abnormalities, including elevated systolic/diastolic ratio, and absent and/or reversed end diastolic velocity. Receiver operator characteristic curves were generated to compare predictive value of UAD abnormalities by FGR definition.

Results:  A total of 619 scans met criteria for FGR between November 2020 and June 2021, with 441 (71%) meeting definition by EFW and 178 (29%) by AC criteria alone. Baseline characteristics were similar between groups. FGR by AC alone was identified earlier (30.4 ± 3.3 vs. 35.4 ± 3.0 weeks' gestation, p < 0.001) with higher proportion identified before 32 weeks (70 vs. 11%, p < 0.001). Proportion of abnormal UAD were similar between groups (15 vs. 15%, adjusted odds ratio: 1.12, 95% confidence interval: 0.61-2.23). Use of EFW alone would have failed to identify 29% of abnormal UAD. A combined definition of FGR had the highest detection of abnormal UAD (area under curve: 0.78 vs. AC alone 0.73 vs. EFW alone 0.69).

Conclusion:  A definition of FGR that considers both EFW and AC improves detection of abnormal UAD.

Key points: · Fetuses with restricted AC are equally likely to exhibit abnormal UAD indices compared with those that meet criteria by EFW.. · Earlier GA of FGR detection and improved detection of abnormal UAD with expanded growth definition.. · Expanded definition of FGR significantly improves detection of abnormal UAD as compared with those diagnosed with EFW criteria alone.. · Expanded growth restriction definition improves Doppler identification..

求助全文
通过发布文献求助,成功后即可免费获取论文全文。 去求助
来源期刊
American journal of perinatology
American journal of perinatology 医学-妇产科学
CiteScore
5.90
自引率
0.00%
发文量
302
审稿时长
4-8 weeks
期刊介绍: The American Journal of Perinatology is an international, peer-reviewed, and indexed journal publishing 14 issues a year dealing with original research and topical reviews. It is the definitive forum for specialists in obstetrics, neonatology, perinatology, and maternal/fetal medicine, with emphasis on bridging the different fields. The focus is primarily on clinical and translational research, clinical and technical advances in diagnosis, monitoring, and treatment as well as evidence-based reviews. Topics of interest include epidemiology, diagnosis, prevention, and management of maternal, fetal, and neonatal diseases. Manuscripts on new technology, NICU set-ups, and nursing topics are published to provide a broad survey of important issues in this field. All articles undergo rigorous peer review, with web-based submission, expedited turn-around, and availability of electronic publication. The American Journal of Perinatology is accompanied by AJP Reports - an Open Access journal for case reports in neonatology and maternal/fetal medicine.
期刊最新文献
Is the Risk of Intrahepatic Cholestasis Increased with Supplemental Progesterone? Management, Utilization, and Outcomes of Preterm Labor in an Integrated Health Care System. Therapeutic Hypothermia for Neonatal Hypoxic-Ischemic Encephalopathy: Reducing Variability in Practice through a Collaborative Telemedicine Initiative. Antenatal Breast Milk Expression Survey of Individuals Whose Pregnancy Was Complicated by Diabetes: Exploring Knowledge, Perceptions, Experiences, and Milk Volume Expressed. Treatment for Neonatal Abstinence Syndrome Using Nonpharmacological Interventions.
×
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