The journal of maternal-fetal & neonatal medicine : the official journal of the European Association of Perinatal Medicine, the Federation of Asia and Oceania Perinatal Societies, the International Society of Perinatal Obstetricians · 2020
Predictive factors in pregnancies with reduced fetal movements: a pilot study.
СтатьяНазвание и аннотация: Перевод в очереди
Обработка статьи · этапы, ошибки и управление
Загрузка состояния…
Ошибки и ограничения
История · было → стало
Состояние обновляется каждые 5 секунд, пока блок открыт. Процент показывается только там, где известен объём работы. Пауза останавливает продолжение этапа; текущий запрос к источнику может завершиться.
Sterpu Irene, Pilo Christina, Lindqvist Pelle G, Åkerud Helena, Wiberg Itzel Eva
Аннотация
BACKGROUND: Pregnancies with reduced fetal movements (RFM) are at risk for poor neonatal outcomes and stillbirth.
AIM: To investigate whether Doppler measurements or angiogenic factors are good predictors of adverse neonatal outcomes in pregnancies with RFM.
METHODS: This is a prospective pilot cohort study of 3243 women seeking care for RFM. Standard care was carried out in all cases. An extra Doppler examination was performed in 128 women to assess the flow in the middle cerebral artery, the umbilical artery, and the uterine artery. In 62/128 pregnancies, a maternal blood sample was obtained for angiogenic and antiangiogenic factors. The composite neonatal outcome of the study was one or more of the following factors: Apgar score <7 at 5', arterial aPh in the umbilical cord ≤7.1, transfer to Neonatal Intensive Care (NICU), stillbirth, and small for gestational age (SGA).
RESULTS: In 14.1% (18/128) of the Doppler group and 11.7% (365/3115) of the standard care group, there was an adverse neonatal outcome (p = .51). A higher intervention rate was found in the Doppler group (28% vs. 5.4%, p < .01). The predictive model of adverse neonatal outcomes in women with RFM with angiogenic factors was 0.73 (95% CI 0.54-0.92). The area under the curve improved to 0.89 (CI 95% 0.81-0.97) when parity was added to the model.
CONCLUSION: Angiogenic factors may have a place in the prediction of the neonatal outcome of RFM pregnancies. The prediction model's capacity was driven by parity. The obstetrical intervention rate increased with additional Doppler examinations.
AIM: To investigate whether Doppler measurements or angiogenic factors are good predictors of adverse neonatal outcomes in pregnancies with RFM.
METHODS: This is a prospective pilot cohort study of 3243 women seeking care for RFM. Standard care was carried out in all cases. An extra Doppler examination was performed in 128 women to assess the flow in the middle cerebral artery, the umbilical artery, and the uterine artery. In 62/128 pregnancies, a maternal blood sample was obtained for angiogenic and antiangiogenic factors. The composite neonatal outcome of the study was one or more of the following factors: Apgar score <7 at 5', arterial aPh in the umbilical cord ≤7.1, transfer to Neonatal Intensive Care (NICU), stillbirth, and small for gestational age (SGA).
RESULTS: In 14.1% (18/128) of the Doppler group and 11.7% (365/3115) of the standard care group, there was an adverse neonatal outcome (p = .51). A higher intervention rate was found in the Doppler group (28% vs. 5.4%, p < .01). The predictive model of adverse neonatal outcomes in women with RFM with angiogenic factors was 0.73 (95% CI 0.54-0.92). The area under the curve improved to 0.89 (CI 95% 0.81-0.97) when parity was added to the model.
CONCLUSION: Angiogenic factors may have a place in the prediction of the neonatal outcome of RFM pregnancies. The prediction model's capacity was driven by parity. The obstetrical intervention rate increased with additional Doppler examinations.