Placental insufficiency

胎盘功能不全
  • 文章类型: Journal Article
    背景:先前的研究努力检查临床特征之间的关联,超声指数,由于对胎儿生长受限的定义缺乏共识,因此阻碍了妊娠不良围产期结局的风险。2016年,一个国际专家小组通过德尔菲程序达成了共识定义,但就目前而言,这并没有得到所有专业组织的认可。
    目的:本研究旨在评估在不符合生长受限的共识标准时,估计胎儿体重和/或腹围<10百分位数与不良围产期结局之间是否存在独立关联。
    方法:数据来自单一学术三级护理机构(2010-2022年)的单胎非异常妊娠被动前瞻性队列,分为三组:(1)符合Delphi胎儿生长受限标准的连续胎儿,(2)未达到共识标准的小胎龄胎儿,和(3)出生体重为20至80百分位的胎儿随机选择为适当生长(适合胎龄)的比较组。这项巢式病例对照研究使用1:1倾向评分匹配来调整3组之间的混杂因素:胎儿生长受限病例,小于胎龄儿,和控制。我们的主要结果是复合:围产期死亡,5分钟Apgar评分<7,帘线pH≤7.10,或碱过量≥12。单变量分析中P值<.2的妊娠特征与胎儿生长受限和小于胎龄一起被考虑纳入多变量模型,以评估哪些结局是不良围产期结局的独立预测因素。
    结果:总体而言,2866例怀孕符合纳入标准。在倾向得分匹配后,有2186对配对,包括511(23%),1093(50%),582例(27%)胎龄小的患者,适合胎龄,和胎儿生长受限组,分别。此外,210例(10%)妊娠因不良围产期结局而复杂化。胎龄小或胎龄合适的孕妇均未导致围产期死亡。根据5分钟Apgar评分和/或脐带气体结果,小胎龄组的511例患者中有23例(5%)出现不良结局,而适当胎龄组的1093例患者中有77例(7%)(优势比,0.62;95%置信区间,0.39-1.00)。此外,符合共识标准的582例胎儿生长受限患者中有110例(19%)出现不良结局(比值比,3.08;95%置信区间,2.25-4.20),其中34例围生儿死亡或出院前死亡。与不良结局几率增加独立相关的因素包括慢性高血压,妊娠高血压疾病,和早发性胎儿生长受限。在对预测不良围产期结局的模型中包含的6个其他因素进行校正后,胎龄小与主要结局无关。模型的受试者工作特征曲线下的偏差校正自举面积为0.72(95%置信区间,0.66-0.74)。预测不良围产期结局的7因素模型的受试者工作特征曲线下的偏差校正自举面积为0.72(95%置信区间,0.66-0.74)。
    结论:这项研究没有发现证据表明,估计胎儿体重和/或腹围为第3至第9百分位数的胎儿不符合胎儿生长受限的共识标准(基于多普勒波形和/或生长速度≥32周),其不良结局的风险增加。尽管应该密切监测这些胎儿的生长,以排除不断发展的生长限制,大多数病例是健康的小胎儿。以与怀疑有病理生长受限的胎儿相同的方式管理这些胎儿可能导致不必要的产前检查,并增加因早产或早期分娩小胎儿而导致医源性并发症的风险,这些胎儿的不良围产期结局的风险相对较低。
    Previous research endeavors examining the association between clinical characteristics, sonographic indices, and the risk of adverse perinatal outcomes in pregnancies complicated by fetal growth restriction have been hampered by a lack of agreement regarding its definition. In 2016, a consensus definition was reached by an international panel of experts via the Delphi procedure, but as it currently stands, this has not been endorsed by all professional organizations.
    This study aimed to assess whether an independent association exists between estimated fetal weight and/or abdominal circumference of <10th percentile and adverse perinatal outcomes when consensus criteria for growth restriction are not met.
    Data were derived from a passive prospective cohort of singleton nonanomalous pregnancies at a single academic tertiary care institution (2010-2022) that fell into 3 groups: (1) consecutive fetuses that met the Delphi criteria for fetal growth restriction, (2) small-for-gestational-age fetuses that failed to meet the consensus criteria, and (3) fetuses with birthweights of 20th to 80th percentile randomly selected as an appropriately grown (appropriate-for-gestational-age) comparator group. This nested case-control study used 1:1 propensity score matching to adjust for confounders among the 3 groups: fetal growth restriction cases, small-for-gestational-age cases, and controls. Our primary outcome was a composite: perinatal demise, 5-minute Apgar score of <7, cord pH of ≤7.10, or base excess of ≥12. Pregnancy characteristics with a P value of <.2 on univariate analyses were considered for incorporation into a multivariable model along with fetal growth restriction and small-for-gestational-age to evaluate which outcomes were independently predictive of adverse perinatal outcomes.
    Overall, 2866 pregnancies met the inclusion criteria. After propensity score matching, there were 2186 matched pairs, including 511 (23%), 1093 (50%), and 582 (27%) patients in the small-for-gestational-age, appropriate-for-gestational-age, and fetal growth restriction groups, respectively. Moreover, 210 pregnancies (10%) were complicated by adverse perinatal outcomes. None of the pregnancies with small-for-gestational-age OR appropriate-for-gestational-age fetuses resulted in perinatal demise. Twenty-three of 511 patients (5%) in the small-for-gestational-age group had adverse outcomes based on 5-minute Apgar scores and/or cord gas results compared with 77 of 1093 patients (7%) in the appropriate-for-gestational-age group (odds ratio, 0.62; 95% confidence interval, 0.39-1.00). Furthermore, 110 of 582 patients (19%) with fetal growth restriction that met the consensus criteria had adverse outcomes (odds ratio, 3.08; 95% confidence interval, 2.25-4.20), including 34 patients with perinatal demise or death before discharge. Factors independently associated with increased odds of adverse outcomes included chronic hypertension, hypertensive disorders of pregnancy, and early-onset fetal growth restriction. Small-for-gestational age was not associated with the primary outcome after adjustment for 6 other factors included in a model predicting adverse perinatal outcomes. The bias-corrected bootstrapped area under the receiver operating characteristic curve for the model was 0.72 (95% confidence interval, 0.66-0.74). The bias-corrected bootstrapped area under the receiver operating characteristic curve for a 7-factor model predicting adverse perinatal outcomes was 0.72 (95% confidence interval, 0.66-0.74).
    This study found no evidence that fetuses with an estimated fetal weight and/or abdominal circumference of 3rd to 9th percentile that fail to meet the consensus criteria for fetal growth restriction (based on Doppler waveforms and/or growth velocity of ≥32 weeks) are at increased risk of adverse outcomes. Although the growth of these fetuses should be monitored closely to rule out evolving growth restriction, most cases are healthy constitutionally small fetuses. The management of these fetuses in the same manner as those with suspected pathologic growth restriction may result in unnecessary antenatal testing and increase the risk of iatrogenic complications resulting from preterm or early term delivery of small fetuses that are at relatively low risk of adverse perinatal outcomes.
    导出

    更多引用

    收藏

    翻译标题摘要

    我要上传

    求助全文

  • 文章类型: Comparative Study
    Small for gestational age is usually defined as an infant with a birthweight <10th centile for a population or customized standard. Fetal growth restriction refers to a fetus that has failed to reach its biological growth potential because of placental dysfunction. Small-for-gestational-age babies make up 28-45% of nonanomalous stillbirths, and have a higher chance of neurodevelopmental delay, childhood and adult obesity, and metabolic disease. The majority of small-for-gestational-age babies are not recognized before birth. Improved identification, accompanied by surveillance and timely delivery, is associated with reduction in small-for-gestational-age stillbirths. Internationally and regionally, detection of small for gestational age and management of fetal growth problems vary considerably. The aim of this review is to: summarize areas of consensus and controversy between recently published national guidelines on small for gestational age or fetal growth restriction; highlight any recent evidence that should be incorporated into existing guidelines; and identify future research priorities in this field. A search of MEDLINE, Google, and the International Guideline Library identified 6 national guidelines on management of pregnancies complicated by fetal growth restriction/small for gestational age published from 2010 onwards. There is general consensus between guidelines (at least 4 of 6 guidelines in agreement) in early pregnancy risk selection, and use of low-dose aspirin for women with major risk factors for placental insufficiency. All highlight the importance of smoking cessation to prevent small for gestational age. While there is consensus in recommending fundal height measurement in the third trimester, 3 specify the use of a customized growth chart, while 2 recommend McDonald rule. Routine third-trimester scanning is not recommended for small-for-gestational-age screening, while women with major risk factors should have serial scanning in the third trimester. Umbilical artery Doppler studies in suspected small-for-gestational-age pregnancies are universally advised, however there is inconsistency in the recommended frequency for growth scans after diagnosis of small for gestational age/fetal growth restriction (2-4 weekly). In late-onset fetal growth restriction (≥32 weeks) general consensus is to use cerebral Doppler studies to influence surveillance and/or delivery timing. Fetal surveillance methods (most recommend cardiotocography) and recommended timing of delivery vary. There is universal agreement on the use of corticosteroids before birth at <34 weeks, and general consensus on the use of magnesium sulfate for neuroprotection in early-onset fetal growth restriction (<32 weeks). Most guidelines advise using cardiotocography surveillance to plan delivery in fetal growth restriction <32 weeks. The recommended gestation at delivery for fetal growth restriction with absent and reversed end-diastolic velocity varies from 32 to ≥34 weeks and 30 to ≥34 weeks, respectively. Overall, where there is high-quality evidence from randomized controlled trials and meta-analyses, eg, use of umbilical artery Doppler and corticosteroids for delivery <34 weeks, there is a high degree of consistency between national small-for-gestational-age guidelines. This review discusses areas where there is potential for convergence between small-for-gestational-age guidelines based on existing randomized controlled trials of management of small-for-gestational-age pregnancies, and areas of controversy. Research priorities include assessing the utility of late third-trimester scanning to prevent major morbidity and mortality and to investigate the optimum timing of delivery in fetuses with late-onset fetal growth restriction and abnormal Doppler parameters. Prospective studies are needed to compare new international population ultrasound standards with those in current use.
    导出

    更多引用

    收藏

    翻译标题摘要

    我要上传

    求助全文

公众号