| Literature DB >> 34784882 |
Giovanni Magenes1, Giuseppe Maria Maruotti2, Maria Gabriella Signorini3, Giuseppina Esposito2, Nicolò Pini3,4, Salvatore Tagliaferri5, Marta Campanile2, Fulvio Zullo2.
Abstract
BACKGROUND: The clinical diagnosis of late Fetal Growth Restriction (FGR) involves the integration of Doppler ultrasound data and Fetal Heart Rate (FHR) monitoring through computer assisted computerized cardiotocography (cCTG). The aim of the study was to evaluate the diagnostic power of combined Doppler and cCTG parameters by contrasting late FGR -and healthy controls.Entities:
Keywords: Antepartum fetal heart rate monitoring; Computerized cardiotocography; Doppler ultrasound data; Late fetal growth restriction; Phase-rectified signal average
Mesh:
Year: 2021 PMID: 34784882 PMCID: PMC8594236 DOI: 10.1186/s12884-021-04235-0
Source DB: PubMed Journal: BMC Pregnancy Childbirth ISSN: 1471-2393 Impact factor: 3.007
Fig. 1Case/Control Recruitment flow chart
Differences in pregnancy characteristics between Late FGR and Control group fetuses
| Pregnancy characteristics | Late FGR ( | Control group ( | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Agea (ys) | 32.25 ± 5.23 | 32.32 ± 5.92 | NS |
| BMI | 29.29 ± 4.58 | 30.25 ± 6.07 | NS |
| Smokerb (%) | 8.4 | 7.3 | NS |
| GA at delivery (wks) | 38.4 ± 0.91 | 39.3 ± 1.18 | |
| Spontaneous delivery (%) | 28.7 (27/94) | 57.8 (89/154) | |
| Cesarean section (%) | 69.1 (65/94) | 42.2 (65/154) |
FGR Fetal Growth Restriction, BMI Body Mass Index, GA Gestational Age
aT-student test for continuous variables
bChi-square test for categorical variables (values are expressed as a percentage)
*values in bold are statistically significant
Differences in Doppler and cCTG characteristics between Late FGR and Control group fetuses
| Doppler and cCTG characteristics | Late FGR ( | Control group ( | |
|---|---|---|---|
| UA_PIa | 1.08 ± 0.42 | 0.99 ± 0.27 | NS |
| MCA_PI | 1.24 ± 0.27 | 1.44 ± 0.18 | |
| FHR (bpm) | 136.03 ± 10.17 | 136.68 ± 8.27 | NS |
| STV (ms) | 5.90 ± 1.88 | 6.56 ± 1.75 | |
| LTV (ms) | 19.64 ± 5.04 | 21.86 ± 4.91 | |
| Delta (ms) | 37.42 ± 9.51 | 41.30 ± 8.70 | |
| II | 0.84 ± 0.05 | 0.85 ± 0.05 | NS |
| ApEn | 1.29 ± 0.14 | 1.33 ± 0.17 | |
| LF (ms2) | 81.62 ± 5.45 | 83.12 ± 4.10 | |
| MF (ms2) | 13.1 ± 3.48 | 12.20 ± 3.03 | |
| HF (ms2) | 5.29 ± 3.80 | 4.68 ± 2.20 | NS |
| LF/(HF + MF) | 4.10 ± 2.12 | 4.13 ± 2.07 | NS |
| APRS (bpm) | 0.36 ± 0.11 | 0.42 ± 0.10 | |
| DPRS (bpm) | −0.37 ± 0.12 | − 0.45 ± 2.11 |
FHR Fetal Heart Rate, STV Short Term Variability, LTV Long Term Irregularity, Delta Delta Index, II Interval Index, ApEn Approximate Entropy, LF Low Frequency, MF Movement Frequency, HF High Frequency, LF/(HF + MF) LF/(HF + MF) ratio, APRS Acceleration Phase Rectified Slope, DPRS Deceleration Phase Rectified Slope
aT-student test for continuous variables
*values in bold are statistically significant
Differences in neonatal outcome between Late FGR and Control group fetuses
| Neonatal outcome | Late FGR ( | Control group ( | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Newborn weighta (gr.) | 2083.79 ± 314.90 | 3315.65 ± 377.09 | |
| Maleb (%) | 46.8 | 55.2 | NS |
| UA pH < 7.05 (%) | 0 | 0 | |
| UA pCO2 | 48.18 ± 8.82 | 45.92 ± 9.39 | 0.09 |
| UA pO2 | 19.55 ± 11.53 | 20.45 ± 9.20 | 0.58 |
| BE (ecf) | −4.05 ± 3.13 | −1.78 ± 2.61 | |
| Lactates | 3.03 ± 1.27 | 2.11 ± 1.09 | |
| Apgar 1 min < 7 (%) | 0 | 0 | |
| Apgar 5 min < 7 (%) | 0 | 0 | |
| NICU (%) | 38.8 (25/94) | 5.1 (8/154) |
BE Base Excess, NICU Neonatal Intensive Care Unit
aT-student test for continuous variables
bChi-square test for categorical variables (values are expressed as a percentage)
*values in bold are statistically significant
Indication for delivery in FGR group
| cCTG anomalies | Fetal growth/EWF | Doppler anomalies | |
|---|---|---|---|
| 15/94 (16%) | 20/94 (21.2%) | 18/94 (19%) | |
| – | 20/94 (21%) | 7/94 (7.4%) | |
| – | 5/94 (5.3%) | 7/94 (7.2%) |
Differences in mean values of cCTG parameters with respect to Doppler abnormalities in late FGR
| cCTG | UA_PI | MCA_PI | CPR | ||||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| < 95th centile ( | > 95th centile ( | > 5th centile ( | < 5th centile ( | > 5th centile ( | < 5th centile ( | ||||
| 6.29 ± 2.12 | 4.93 ± 1.47 | 6.17 ± 2.00 | 4.27 ± 1.48 | 6.03 ± 2.06 | 5.68 ± 2.03 | NS | |||
| 39.02 ± 10.67 | 32.79 ± 7.11 | NS | 38.62 ± 9.71 | 28.99 ± 9.06 | 37.64 ± 10.20 | 36.61 ± 10.23 | NS | ||
| 0.37 ± 0.12 | 0.31 ± 0.09 | NS | 0.37 ± 0.11 | 0.27 ± 0.09 | 0.35 ± 0.11 | 0.34 ± 0.12 | NS | ||
| − 0.39 ± 0.14 | − 0.30 ± 0.09 | −0.38 ± 0.14 | −0.26 ± 0.09 | −0.37 ± 0.13 | −0.35 ± 0.14 | NS | |||
STV Short Term Variability, Delta Delta Index, APRS Acceleration Phase Rectified Slope, DPRS Deceleration Phase Rectified Slope
*values in bold are statistically significant
Fig. 2ROC curves for STV, Delta, APRS and DPRS for the binary classification of UA_PI >95th centile (left) and MCA_PI <5th centile (right), respectively. The AUC of ROC curves was accurate for STV (0.76), Delta (0.77), APRS (0.73) and DPRS (0.76) when MCA_PI values were < 5th centile with a cut-off value for STV of 5.24 (sensitivity 0.64 and specificity 0.71), Delta of 32.40 (sensitivity 0.76 and specificity 0.71), APRS of 0.27 (sensitivity 0.81 and specificity 0.57) and DPRS of − 0.24 (sensitivity 0.91 and specificity 0.57)