Literature DB >> 20178115

Middle versus anterior cerebral artery Doppler for the prediction of perinatal outcome and neonatal neurobehavior in term small-for-gestational-age fetuses with normal umbilical artery Doppler.

D Oros1, F Figueras, R Cruz-Martinez, N Padilla, E Meler, E Hernandez-Andrade, E Gratacos.   

Abstract

OBJECTIVE: To evaluate whether anterior cerebral artery (ACA) Doppler ultrasonography is superior to middle cerebral artery (MCA) Doppler in the prediction of perinatal outcome and neonatal neurobehavior in term small-for-gestational-age (SGA) fetuses with normal umbilical artery (UA) Doppler.
METHODS: MCA and ACA Doppler ultrasonography was performed in a cohort of SGA term fetuses with normal UA Doppler. Perinatal outcome and neonatal neurobehavioral performance were compared with a group of term appropriate-for-gestational age (AGA) infants. Neurobehavior was evaluated at 40 ( +/- 1) weeks of corrected age with the Neonatal Behavioral Assessment Scale. Differences between the study groups were adjusted for potential confounding variables by multiple linear or logistic regression analyis.
RESULTS: A total of 199 newborns (98 SGA and 101 AGA) were included. Among the SGA fetuses, 28.6 and 17% had MCA and ACA redistribution, respectively. Cases with either type of redistribution had an increased risk for adverse outcome, with no differences in predictive performance between the two parameters. SGA fetuses with MCA redistribution compared with controls had an increased risk for abnormal neurobehavioral performance in motor (36 vs. 20%; adjusted P = 0.02) and state organization (25 vs. 17.5%; adjusted P = 0.03) areas. SGA fetuses with ACA redistribution had only an increased risk for abnormal neurobehavioral performance area in state organization compared with controls (30 vs. 17.5%; adjusted P = 0.021).
CONCLUSION: In term SGA newborns with no signs of brain-sparing, ACA Doppler investigation does not provide any benefit over MCA in terms of the prediction of adverse perinatal outcome. Copyright 2009 ISUOG. Published by John Wiley & Sons, Ltd.

Entities:  

Mesh:

Year:  2010        PMID: 20178115     DOI: 10.1002/uog.7588

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Ultrasound Obstet Gynecol        ISSN: 0960-7692            Impact factor:   7.299


  10 in total

1.  Changes in biometry and cerebroplacental hemodynamics in fetuses with congenital heart diseases.

Authors:  Alberto Borges Peixoto; Gabriele Tonni; Edward Araujo Júnior
Journal:  J Thorac Dis       Date:  2016-10       Impact factor: 2.895

Review 2.  Detection and assessment of brain injury in the growth-restricted fetus and neonate.

Authors:  Atul Malhotra; Michael Ditchfield; Michael C Fahey; Margie Castillo-Melendez; Beth J Allison; Graeme R Polglase; Euan M Wallace; Ryan Hodges; Graham Jenkin; Suzanne L Miller
Journal:  Pediatr Res       Date:  2017-05-17       Impact factor: 3.756

Review 3.  Electroencephalographic studies in growth-restricted and small-for-gestational-age neonates.

Authors:  Nathan J Stevenson; Melissa M Lai; Hava E Starkman; Paul B Colditz; Julie A Wixey
Journal:  Pediatr Res       Date:  2022-02-23       Impact factor: 3.756

Review 4.  Clinical Opinion: The diagnosis and management of suspected fetal growth restriction: an evidence-based approach.

Authors:  Christoph C Lees; Roberto Romero; Tamara Stampalija; Andrea Dall'Asta; Greggory A DeVore; Federico Prefumo; Tiziana Frusca; Gerard H A Visser; John C Hobbins; Ahmet A Baschat; Caterina M Bilardo; Henry L Galan; Stuart Campbell; Dev Maulik; Francesc Figueras; Wesley Lee; Julia Unterscheider; Herbert Valensise; Fabricio Da Silva Costa; Laurent J Salomon; Liona C Poon; Enrico Ferrazzi; Giancarlo Mari; Giuseppe Rizzo; John C Kingdom; Torvid Kiserud; Kurt Hecher
Journal:  Am J Obstet Gynecol       Date:  2022-01-10       Impact factor: 10.693

Review 5.  The consequences of fetal growth restriction on brain structure and neurodevelopmental outcome.

Authors:  Suzanne L Miller; Petra S Huppi; Carina Mallard
Journal:  J Physiol       Date:  2016-01-05       Impact factor: 5.182

Review 6.  Consequences in infants that were intrauterine growth restricted.

Authors:  Erich Cosmi; Tiziana Fanelli; Silvia Visentin; Daniele Trevisanuto; Vincenzo Zanardo
Journal:  J Pregnancy       Date:  2011-03-20

7.  Metabolomic profile of umbilical cord blood plasma from early and late intrauterine growth restricted (IUGR) neonates with and without signs of brain vasodilation.

Authors:  Magdalena Sanz-Cortés; Rodrigo J Carbajo; Fatima Crispi; Francesc Figueras; Antonio Pineda-Lucena; Eduard Gratacós
Journal:  PLoS One       Date:  2013-12-02       Impact factor: 3.240

Review 8.  Stem Cell Therapy for Neuroprotection in the Growth-Restricted Newborn.

Authors:  Kirat Chand; Rachel Nano; Julie Wixey; Jatin Patel
Journal:  Stem Cells Transl Med       Date:  2022-04-29       Impact factor: 7.655

9.  Patterns of Brain Sparing in a Fetal Growth Restriction Cohort.

Authors:  Jon G Steller; Diane Gumina; Camille Driver; Emma Peek; Henry L Galan; Shane Reeves; John C Hobbins
Journal:  J Clin Med       Date:  2022-08-01       Impact factor: 4.964

10.  The CD94/NKG2A inhibitory receptor educates uterine NK cells to optimize pregnancy outcomes in humans and mice.

Authors:  Norman Shreeve; Delphine Depierreux; Delia Hawkes; James A Traherne; Ulla Sovio; Oisin Huhn; Jyothi Jayaraman; Amir Horowitz; Hormas Ghadially; John R B Perry; Ashley Moffett; John G Sled; Andrew M Sharkey; Francesco Colucci
Journal:  Immunity       Date:  2021-04-21       Impact factor: 31.745

  10 in total

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.