Search

Purpose: To establish the accuracy of ultrasound in detecting fetal anomalies looking at the concordance between prenatal and postnatal diagnosis. Materials and methods: Retrospective analysis of concordance between prenatal and postnatal/autoptic diagnosis of fetuses with congenital abnormalities. Data are from a single center (Policlinico di Modena); all fetuses included were born between 2017 and 2018 and with a follow-up of at least 6 months. We included all deliveries (including perinatal deaths) and termination of pregnancy (TOP) for fetal indication. We calculated sensibility, sensitivity, Positive and Negative Likelihood Ratio, positive and negative predictive value of ultrasound. Results: During the study period 5920 deliveries, including perinatal deaths, and 28 TOP for fetal indication were registered at our center. The prevalence of congenital malformations was 2.6% (153/5920). At least one ultrasound was performed in our center in 1250 women delivering in our unit. All 28 TOP had the anomaly scan performed in our center. Among the total 1278 women scanned in our unit, there were 128 (10%) suspicious scans. In 5/128 (3.9%) cases we diagnosed a false alarm; in 8/128 (6.2%) cases an evolutive malformation with in-utero regression. The prenatal diagnosis was confirmed in 77 (60.2%) cases at birth and in 28/128 (21.9%) at postmortem analysis while there were 10/128 false positive (7.8%). Among the 153 congenital malformations diagnosed at birth, the anomaly scan was performed in our Prenatal Medicine Unit in 92 (60.1%) fetuses. Among these, there were 15 false negatives (9.8%) while in 77/92 (83.7%) the malformation at birth agreed with the sonographic diagnosis. Sensitivity and specificity of ultrasound were 87.5% (IC95 80.2-92.8%) and 99.1% (IC95 98.4-99.6%) respectively with a Positive Likelihood Ratio and Negative Likelihood Ratio of 101.3 (IC95 54.5-188.5) and 0.13 (IC95 0.08-0.2); Positive Predictive Value and Negative Predictive Value were 91.3% (IC95 85-95.1%) and 98.7(IC95 98-99.2%). Conclusion: Anomaly scan in pregnancy allows the diagnosis of congenital malformations with a sensibility of 87.5% and specificity of 99.1%. The main limitations of this study are its retrospective design and that it was conducted in a single referral center. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Background Cerebroplacental Doppler studies have been advocated to predict the risk of adverse perinatal outcome (APO) irrespective of fetal weight. Objective To report the diagnostic performance of cerebroplacental (CPR) and umbilicocerebral (UCR) ratios in predicting APO in appropriate for gestational age (AGA) fetuses and in those affected by late fetal growth restriction (FGR) attempting vaginal delivery. Study design Multicenter, retrospective, nested case-control study between 1 January 2017 and January 2020 involving five referral centers in Italy and Spain. Singleton gestations with a scan between 36 and 40 weeks and within two weeks of attempting vaginal delivery were included. Fetal arterial Doppler and biometry were collected. The AGA group was defined as fetuses with an estimated fetal weight and abdominal circumference >10th and <90th percentile, while the late FGR group was defined by Delphi consensus criteria. The primary outcome was the prediction of a composite of perinatal adverse outcomes including either intrauterine death, Apgar score at 5 min <7, abnormal acid-base status (umbilical artery pH < 7.1 or base excess of more than −11) and neonatal intensive care unit (NICU) admission. Area under the curve (AUC) analysis was performed. Results 646 pregnancies (317 in the AGA group and 329 in the late FGR group) were included. APO were present in 12.6% AGA and 24.3% late FGR pregnancies, with an odds ratio of 2.22 (95% CI 1.46–3.37). The performance of CPR and UCR for predicting APO was poor in both AGA [AUC: 0.44 (0.39–0.51)] and late FGR fetuses [AUC: 0.56 (0.49–0.61)]. Conclusions CPR and UCR on their own are poor prognostic predictors of APO irrespective of fetal weight. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Introduction: The aim of this study was to compare vaginal dinoprostone and mechanical methods for induction of labor (IOL) in pregnancies complicated by late fetal growth restriction. Material and methods: Multicenter, retrospective, cohort study involving six referral centers in Italy and Spain. Inclusion criteria were pregnancies complicated by late fetal growth restriction as defined by Delphi consensus criteria. The primary outcome was the occurrence of uterine tachysystole; secondary outcomes were either cesarean delivery or operative vaginal delivery for non‐reassuring fetal status, a composite score of adverse neonatal outcome and admission to neonatal intensive care unit (NICU). Univariate and multivariate logistic regression analysis was used to analyze the data. Results: A total of 571 pregnancies complicated by late fetal growth restriction undergoing IOL (391 with dinoprostone and 180 with mechanical methods) were included in the analysis. The incidence of uterine tachysystole (19.2% vs. 5.6%; p = 0.001) was higher in women undergoing IOL with dinoprostone than in those undergoing IOL with mechanical methods. Similarly, the incidence of cesarean delivery or operative delivery for non‐reassuring fetal status (25.6% vs. 17.2%; p = 0.027), composite adverse neonatal outcome (26.1% vs. 16.7%; p = 0.013) and NICU admission (16.9% vs. 5.6%; p < 0.001) was higher in women undergoing IOL with dinoprostone than in those undergoing IOL with mechanical methods. At logistic regression analysis, IOL with mechanical methods was associated with a significantly lower risk of uterine tachysystole (odds ratio 0.26, 95% confidence interval 0.13‐0.54; p < 0.001). Conclusions: In pregnancies complicated by late fetal growth restriction, IOL with mechanical methods is associated with a lower risk of uterine tachysystole, cesarean delivery or operative delivery for non‐reassuring fetal status, and adverse neonatal outcome compared with pharmacological methods. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Introduction: The role of cerebroplacental ratio (CPR) or umbilicocerebral ratio (UCR) to predict adverse intrapartum and perinatal outcomes in pregnancies complicated by late fetal growth restriction (FGR) remains controversial. Methods: This was a multicenter, retrospective cohort study involving 5 referral centers in Italy and Spain, including singleton pregnancies complicated by late FGR, as defined by Delphi consensus criteria, with a scan 1 week prior to delivery. The primary objective was to compare the diagnostic accuracy of the CPR and UCR for the prediction of a composite adverse outcome, defined as the presence of either an adverse intrapartum outcome (need for operative delivery/cesarean section for suspected fetal distress) or an adverse perinatal outcome (intrauterine death, Apgar score <7 at 5 min, arterial pH <7.1, base excess of >−11 mEq/mL, or neonatal intensive care unit admission). Results: Median CPR absolute values (1.11 vs. 1.22, p = 0.018) and centiles (3 vs. 4, p = 0.028) were lower in pregnancies with a composite adverse outcome than in those without it. Median UCR absolute values (0.89 vs. 0.82, p = 0.018) and centiles (97 vs. 96, p = 0.028) were higher. However, the area under the curve, 95% confidence interval for predicting the composite adverse outcome showed a poor predictive value: 0.580 (0.512–0.646) for the raw absolute values of CPR and UCR, and 0.575 (0.507–0.642) for CPR and UCR centiles adjusted for gestational age. The use of dichotomized values (CPR <1, UCR >1 or CPR <5th centile, UCR >95th centile) did not improve the diagnostic accuracy. Conclusion: The CPR and UCR measured in the week prior delivery are of low predictive value to assess adverse intrapartum and perinatal outcomes in pregnancies with late FGR. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]