Literature DB >> 26171896

Ultrasound for fetal assessment in early pregnancy.

Melissa Whitworth1, Leanne Bricker, Clare Mullan.   

Abstract

BACKGROUND: Diagnostic ultrasound is a sophisticated electronic technology, which utilises pulses of high-frequency sound to produce an image. Diagnostic ultrasound examination may be employed in a variety of specific circumstances during pregnancy such as after clinical complications, or where there are concerns about fetal growth. Because adverse outcomes may also occur in pregnancies without clear risk factors, assumptions have been made that routine ultrasound in all pregnancies will prove beneficial by enabling earlier detection and improved management of pregnancy complications. Routine screening may be planned for early pregnancy, late gestation, or both. The focus of this review is routine early pregnancy ultrasound.
OBJECTIVES: To assess whether routine early pregnancy ultrasound for fetal assessment (i.e. its use as a screening technique) influences the diagnosis of fetal malformations, multiple pregnancies, the rate of clinical interventions, and the incidence of adverse fetal outcome when compared with the selective use of early pregnancy ultrasound (for specific indications). SEARCH
METHODS: We searched the Cochrane Pregnancy and Childbirth Group's Trials Register (30 March 2015) and reference lists of retrieved studies. SELECTION CRITERIA: Published, unpublished, and ongoing randomised controlled trials that compared outcomes in women who experienced routine versus selective early pregnancy ultrasound (i.e. less than 24 weeks' gestation). We have included quasi-randomised trials. DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS: Two review authors independently assessed trials for inclusion and risk of bias, extracted data and checked them for accuracy. We used the Review Manager software to enter and analyse data. MAIN
RESULTS: Routine/revealed ultrasound versus selective ultrasound/concealed: 11 trials including 37,505 women. Ultrasound for fetal assessment in early pregnancy reduces the failure to detect multiple pregnancy by 24 weeks' gestation (risk ratio (RR) 0.07, 95% confidence interval (CI) 0.03 to 0.17; participants = 295; studies = 7), moderate quality of evidence). Routine scans improve the detection of major fetal abnormality before 24 weeks' gestation (RR 3.46, 95% CI 1.67 to 7.14; participants = 387; studies = 2,moderate quality of evidence). Routine scan is associated with a reduction in inductions of labour for 'post term' pregnancy (RR 0.59, 95% CI 0.42 to 0.83; participants = 25,516; studies = 8), but the evidence related to this outcome is of low quality, because most of the pooled effect was provided by studies with design limitation with presence of heterogeneity (I² = 68%). Ultrasound for fetal assessment in early pregnancy does not impact on perinatal death (defined as stillbirth after trial entry, or death of a liveborn infant up to 28 days of age) (RR 0.89, 95% CI 0.70 to 1.12; participants = 35,735; studies = 10, low quality evidence). Routine scans do not seem to be associated with reductions in adverse outcomes for babies or in health service use by mothers and babies. Long-term follow-up of children exposed to scan in utero does not indicate that scans have a detrimental effect on children's physical or cognitive development.The review includes several large, well-designed trials but lack of blinding was a problem common to all studies and this may have an effect on some outcomes. The quality of evidence was assessed for all review primary outcomes and was judged as moderate or low. Downgrading of evidence was based on including studies with design limitations, imprecision of results and presence of heterogeneity. AUTHORS'
CONCLUSIONS: Early ultrasound improves the early detection of multiple pregnancies and improved gestational dating may result in fewer inductions for post maturity. Caution needs to be exercised in interpreting the results of aspects of this review in view of the fact that there is considerable variability in both the timing and the number of scans women received.

Entities:  

Mesh:

Year:  2015        PMID: 26171896      PMCID: PMC6464767          DOI: 10.1002/14651858.CD007058.pub3

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Cochrane Database Syst Rev        ISSN: 1361-6137


  65 in total

Review 1.  Ultrasound screening in pregnancy: a systematic review of the clinical effectiveness, cost-effectiveness and women's views.

Authors:  L Bricker; J Garcia; J Henderson; M Mugford; J Neilson; T Roberts; M A Martin
Journal:  Health Technol Assess       Date:  2000       Impact factor: 4.014

2.  The effects on maternal anxiety of two-dimensional versus two- plus three-/four-dimensional ultrasound in pregnancies at risk of fetal abnormalities: A randomized study.

Authors:  K Y Leung; C S W Ngai; A Lee; H Y Chan; W C Leung; C P Lee; M H Y Tang
Journal:  Ultrasound Obstet Gynecol       Date:  2006-09       Impact factor: 7.299

Review 3.  Transvaginal sonographic measurement of cervical length to predict preterm birth in asymptomatic women at increased risk: a systematic review.

Authors:  J M G Crane; D Hutchens
Journal:  Ultrasound Obstet Gynecol       Date:  2008-05       Impact factor: 7.299

Review 4.  Antenatal ultrasound screening for fetal abnormalities: a systematic review of studies of cost and cost effectiveness.

Authors:  Tracy Roberts; Jane Henderson; Miranda Mugford; Leanne Bricker; James Neilson; Jo Garcia
Journal:  BJOG       Date:  2002-01       Impact factor: 6.531

5.  Routine ultrasound screening in pregnancy and the children's subsequent handedness.

Authors:  H Kieler; O Axelsson; B Haglund; S Nilsson; K A Salvesen
Journal:  Early Hum Dev       Date:  1998-01-09       Impact factor: 2.079

6.  Effect of first-trimester ultrasound screening for Down syndrome on maternal-fetal attachment--a randomized controlled trial.

Authors:  S Georgsson Öhman; U Waldenström
Journal:  Sex Reprod Healthc       Date:  2010-05-26

7.  Predictive value of ultrasound measurement in early pregnancy: a randomized controlled trial.

Authors:  M J Bennett; G Little; J Dewhurst; G Chamberlain
Journal:  Br J Obstet Gynaecol       Date:  1982-05

8.  Routine obstetric ultrasound examinations in South Africa: cost and effect on perinatal outcome--a prospective randomised controlled trial.

Authors:  L T Geerts; E J Brand; G B Theron
Journal:  Br J Obstet Gynaecol       Date:  1996-06

9.  Use of antenatal care services in a controlled ultrasound screening trial.

Authors:  A Saari-Kemppainen
Journal:  Acta Obstet Gynecol Scand       Date:  1995-01       Impact factor: 3.636

10.  Routine ultrasonography in utero and subsequent growth during childhood.

Authors:  K A Salvesen; G Jacobsen; L J Vatten; S H Eik-Nes; L S Bakketeig
Journal:  Ultrasound Obstet Gynecol       Date:  1993-01-01       Impact factor: 7.299

View more
  48 in total

1.  Ultrasound-Guided Second Trimester Fetal Electroencephalography in Two Pregnant Volunteers: A Technical Note.

Authors:  Adnan I Qureshi; Muhammad Shah Miran; Shijing Li; Meijing Jiang
Journal:  J Vasc Interv Neurol       Date:  2016-06

2.  A systematic scoping review to identify the design and assess the performance of devices for antenatal continuous fetal monitoring.

Authors:  Kajal K Tamber; Dexter J L Hayes; Stephen J Carey; Jayawan H B Wijekoon; Alexander E P Heazell
Journal:  PLoS One       Date:  2020-12-01       Impact factor: 3.240

3.  Rapid and automatic assessment of early gestational age using computer vision and biometric measurements based on ultrasound video.

Authors:  Yuanyuan Pei; Wenjing Gao; Longjiang E; Changpin Dai; Jin Han; Haiyu Wang; Huiying Liang
Journal:  Quant Imaging Med Surg       Date:  2022-04

4.  How to perform a sonographic morphological assessment of the fetus at 11-14 weeks of gestation.

Authors:  Edward Andrew Springhall; Daniel Lorber Rolnik; Maya Reddy; Sujatha Ganesan; Maria Maxfield; Jayshree Ramkrishna; Simon Meagher; Mark Teoh; Fabricio da Silva Costa
Journal:  Australas J Ultrasound Med       Date:  2018-08-22

Review 5.  Routine ultrasound for fetal assessment before 24 weeks' gestation.

Authors:  Andrea Kaelin Agten; Jun Xia; Juliette A Servante; Jim G Thornton; Nia W Jones
Journal:  Cochrane Database Syst Rev       Date:  2021-08-26

6.  Routine antenatal ultrasound in low- and middle-income countries: first look - a cluster randomised trial.

Authors:  R L Goldenberg; R O Nathan; D Swanson; S Saleem; W Mirza; F Esamai; D Muyodi; A L Garces; L Figueroa; E Chomba; M Chiwala; M Mwenechanya; A Tshefu; A Lokangako; V L Bolamba; J L Moore; H Franklin; J Swanson; E A Liechty; C L Bose; N F Krebs; K Michael Hambidge; W A Carlo; N Kanaiza; F Naqvi; I S Pineda; W López-Gomez; D Hamsumonde; M S Harrison; M Koso-Thomas; M Miodovnik; D D Wallace; E M McClure
Journal:  BJOG       Date:  2018-06-15       Impact factor: 6.531

7.  Induction of labour at or beyond 37 weeks' gestation.

Authors:  Philippa Middleton; Emily Shepherd; Jonathan Morris; Caroline A Crowther; Judith C Gomersall
Journal:  Cochrane Database Syst Rev       Date:  2020-07-15

8.  Antenatal interventions for preventing stillbirth, fetal loss and perinatal death: an overview of Cochrane systematic reviews.

Authors:  Erika Ota; Katharina da Silva Lopes; Philippa Middleton; Vicki Flenady; Windy Mv Wariki; Md Obaidur Rahman; Ruoyan Tobe-Gai; Rintaro Mori
Journal:  Cochrane Database Syst Rev       Date:  2020-12-18

9.  Cost estimation alongside a multi-regional, multi-country randomized trial of antenatal ultrasound in five low-and-middle-income countries.

Authors:  B W Bresnahan; E Vodicka; J B Babigumira; A M Malik; F Yego; A Lokangaka; B M Chitah; Z Bauer; H Chavez; J L Moore; L P Garrison; J O Swanson; D Swanson; E M McClure; R L Goldenberg; F Esamai; A L Garces; E Chomba; S Saleem; A Tshefu; C L Bose; M Bauserman; W Carlo; S Bucher; E A Liechty; R O Nathan
Journal:  BMC Public Health       Date:  2021-05-20       Impact factor: 3.295

10.  Medical treatment for early fetal death (less than 24 weeks).

Authors:  Marike Lemmers; Marianne Ac Verschoor; Bobae Veronica Kim; Martha Hickey; Juan C Vazquez; Ben Willem J Mol; James P Neilson
Journal:  Cochrane Database Syst Rev       Date:  2019-06-17
View more

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.