PDF herunterladen
CC BY-NC-ND 4.0 · Indian J Radiol Imaging 2023; 33(01): 107-109
DOI: 10.1055/s-0042-1758875
Brief Report

Prioritizing Fetal Structural Abnormalities Over Risk for Pre-Eclampsia and Fetal Growth Restriction in the 20-24 Gestation Week Assessment in India: Missing the Woods for the Trees?

Rijo Mathew Choorakuttil
1   Department of Clinical Radiology, AMMA Center for Diagnosis and Preventive Medicine, Kochi, Kerala, India
,
Shilpa R Satarkar
2   Department of Clinical Radiology, Antarang Sonography and Colour Doppler Center, Satarkar Hospital, Tilaknagar, Aurangabad, Maharashtra, India
,
Lalit K. Sharma
3   Department of Clinical Radiology, Raj Sonography & X-Ray Clinic, Baiju Choraha, Nayapura, Guna, Madhya Pradesh, India
,
Anjali Gupta
4   Department of Clinical Radiology, Anjali Ultrasound and Colour Doppler Centre, Shanti Madhuban Plaza, Delhi Gate, Agra, Uttar Pradesh, India
,
Akanksha Baghel
5   Department of Clinical Radiology, Baghel Sonography Center, Harda, Madhya Pradesh, India
,
Praveen K. Nirmalan 
6   Department of Research, Chief Research Mentor, AMMA Education and Research Foundation, AMMA Healthcare Research Gurukul, Kochi, Kerala, India
› Institutsangaben
› Weitere Informationen
   Lizenzen und Reprints

Abstract

Aim To compare the magnitude of fetuses with congenital anomalies, pregnant women identified at high risk for preterm pre-eclampsia (PE) or with preterm PE, and with early fetal growth restriction (FGR) or high risk for FGR at the second trimester assessment at 20 to 24 weeks of gestation.

Methods A standardized trimester-specific protocol that included clinical and demographic details, fetal biometry, estimated fetal weight (EFW), fetal abdominal circumference (FAC), mean arterial blood pressure and fetal Doppler studies was used to identify high risk for preterm PE and FGR. The Targeted Imaging for Fetal Anomalies (TIFFA) scan was used to identify congenital anomalies. In addition, 95% confidence intervals of the point estimates were derived, and the p-value was estimated to assess the statistical significance of the difference in proportions.

Results Analysis of the data of 4,572 pregnant women screened between 20 and 24 gestation weeks showed a significantly lower prevalence (p < 0.001) of congenital abnormalities (3.81%) compared to women diagnosed with early PE (2.71%) or with a high risk for PE (4.00%) and women (6.80%) with early FGR or at higher risk for fetal growth restriction with both EFW and FAC < 10th percentile.

Conclusion The data on prevalence from Samrakshan show that the second-trimester assessment of pregnant women in India must expand its scope from the TIFFA scan to also focus on screening to identify women at high risk for preterm PE and FGR.

Keywords

fetal abnormality - fetal growth restriction - preeclampsia - second-trimester ultrasound - ultrasound

Work Attributed to

Indian Radiological & Imaging Association, IRIA House, C-5, Qutab Institutional Area, New Delhi-110016, India.




Publikationsverlauf

Artikel online veröffentlicht:
11. Dezember 2022

© 2022. Indian Radiological Association. This is an open access article published by Thieme under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution-NonDerivative-NonCommercial License, permitting copying and reproduction so long as the original work is given appropriate credit. Contents may not be used for commercial purposes, or adapted, remixed, transformed or built upon. (https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc-nd/4.0/)

Thieme Medical and Scientific Publishers Pvt. Ltd.
A-12, 2nd Floor, Sector 2, Noida-201301 UP, India

 

  • References

  • 1 Bhide P, Kar A. A national estimate of the birth prevalence of congenital anomalies in India: systematic review and meta-analysis. BMC Pediatr 2018; 18 (01) 175
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 2 Bhide P, Gund P, Kar A. Prevalence of congenital anomalies in an Indian maternal cohort: healthcare, prevention, and surveillance Implications. PLoS One 2016; 11 (11) e0166408
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 3 Lees CC, Stampalija T, Baschat A. et al. ISUOG practice guidelines: diagnosis and management of small-for-gestational-age fetus and fetal growth restriction. Ultrasound Obstet Gynecol 2020; 56 (02) 298-312
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 4 Sotiriadis A, Hernandez-Andrade E, da Silva Costa F. et al; ISUOG CSC Pre-eclampsia Task Force. ISUOG practice guidelines: role of ultrasound in screening for and follow-up of pre-eclampsia. Ultrasound Obstet Gynecol 2019; 53 (01) 7-22
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 5 Figueras F, Gratacós E. Update on the diagnosis and classification of fetal growth restriction and proposal of a stage-based management protocol. Fetal Diagn Ther 2014; 36 (02) 86-98
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 6 Moraitis AA, Wood AM, Fleming M, Smith GCS. Birth weight percentile and the risk of term perinatal death. Obstet Gynecol 2014; 124 (2 Pt 1): 274-283
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 7 Vasak B, Koenen SV, Koster MP. et al. Human fetal growth is constrained below optimal for perinatal survival. Ultrasound Obstet Gynecol 2015; 45 (02) 162-167
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 8 Choorakuttil RM, Patel H, Bavaharan R. et al. Samrakshan: an Indian Radiological and Imaging Association program to reduce perinatal mortality in India. Indian J Radiol Imaging 2019; 29 (04) 412-417
    Artikel in Thieme ConnectPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 9 Van Doorn R, Mukhtarova N, Flyke IP. et al. Dose of aspirin to prevent preterm preeclampsia in women with moderate or high-risk factors: a systematic review and meta-analysis. PLoS One 2021; 16 (03) e0247782
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 10 Rolnik DL, Wright D, Poon LC. et al. Aspirin versus placebo in pregnancies at high risk for preterm preeclampsia. N Engl J Med 2017; 377 (07) 613-622
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar