Literature DB >> 23023941

Factors affecting feasibility and quality of second-trimester ultrasound scans in obese pregnant women.

F Fuchs1, M Houllier, A Voulgaropoulos, J-M Levaillant, C Colmant, J Bouyer, M-V Senat.   

Abstract

OBJECTIVES: To evaluate the feasibility of completing in one session a second-trimester ultrasound scan in obese pregnant women, to compare the quality of images obtained with those of non-obese women and to analyze factors that can improve the completion rate.
METHODS: This prospective study, from 2009 to 2011, included all obese pregnant women (prepregnancy body mass index (BMI) > 30 kg/m2) who had an ultrasound examination at 20-24 weeks in our department, and a control group of pregnant women with normal BMI (20-24.9 kg/m2) who had the same examination. A single operator reviewed the standardized ultrasound images (three biometric and six to assess key anatomical features) required under French guidelines, to assess their presence, evaluate the quality of all images and score the quality of the six anatomical images. Each image was assessed according to between four and six criteria, each worth one point. We sought excellent quality, defined as the frequency of maximum points for a given image type. The factors associated with completing the scan in one session were evaluated with multivariate logistic regression.
RESULTS: The obese group included 223 women and the control group 60; a complete scan in one session was achieved in 70.4% and 81.7% of these, respectively (P = 0.08). The completion rate for each image type was at least 95% in the control group and 90% in the obese group, except for diaphragm and right outflow tract images. Significant factors associated with completing the scan in the multivariate model were: having 10 additional minutes for the scan (P = 0.03), moving the fetus so that the back was in posterior or lateral position (P = 0.01), more experienced sonographer (P = 0.03) and thinner maternal abdominal wall thickness (P = 0.01). Overall, the excellence rate varied from 35% to 92% in the normal BMI group and from 18% to 58% in the obese group, and was significantly lower in the latter for all images except abdominal circumference (P = 0.26) and spine (P = 0.06). Anatomical quality scores were also significantly lower in the obese group (22.3 vs. 27.2; P = 0.001).
CONCLUSION: Although ultrasound scans of obese pregnant women are feasible, image quality and global anatomical scores are significantly lower among obese than normal-weight women. However, certain simple improvements may increase fetal visualization.
Copyright © 2013 ISUOG. Published by John Wiley & Sons, Ltd.

Entities:  

Mesh:

Year:  2013        PMID: 23023941     DOI: 10.1002/uog.12311

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


  8 in total

1.  The Performance of First-Trimester Anatomy Scan: A Decision Analysis.

Authors:  Lorie M Harper; S Lindsay Wood; Sheri M Jenkins; John Owen; Joseph R Biggio
Journal:  Am J Perinatol       Date:  2016-04-22       Impact factor: 1.862

2.  Helping expectant mothers understand inadequate ultrasound images.

Authors:  Crispian Oates; Paula Taylor
Journal:  Ultrasound       Date:  2016-05-20

3.  Elevated hsa-miR-99a levels in maternal plasma may indicate congenital heart defects.

Authors:  Lars Kehler; Orsolya Biro; Levente Lazar; Janos Rigo; Balint Nagy
Journal:  Biomed Rep       Date:  2015-08-27

4.  A comparison of transumbilical single-port laparoscopic appendectomy and conventional three-port laparoscopic appendectomy: from the diagnosis to the hospital cost.

Authors:  Seung Min Baik; Kyung Sook Hong; Yong Il Kim
Journal:  J Korean Surg Soc       Date:  2013-07-25

5.  Incoherent Clutter Suppression Using Lag-One Coherence.

Authors:  Will Long; Nick Bottenus; Gregg E Trahey
Journal:  IEEE Trans Ultrason Ferroelectr Freq Control       Date:  2020-02-28       Impact factor: 2.725

6.  Ultrasound (in)accuracy: it's in the formulae not in the technique - assessment of accuracy of abdominal circumference measurement in term pregnancies.

Authors:  Erin M Nesbitt-Hawes; Emma Tetstall; Kiera Gee; Alec W Welsh
Journal:  Australas J Ultrasound Med       Date:  2015-12-31

Review 7.  Limitations of Aneuploidy and Anomaly Detection in the Obese Patient.

Authors:  Paula Zozzaro-Smith; Lisa M Gray; Stephen J Bacak; Loralei L Thornburg
Journal:  J Clin Med       Date:  2014-07-17       Impact factor: 4.241

8.  Association between amniotic fluid evaluation and fetal biometry: a prospective French "Flash" study.

Authors:  Florent Fuchs; Safa Aouinti; Manel Souaied; Valentin Keller; Marie-Christine Picot; Nicolas Fries; Jean-Marc Ayoubi; Olivier Picone
Journal:  Sci Rep       Date:  2018-05-04       Impact factor: 4.379

  8 in total

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.