Screening for fetal well-being in a high-risk pregnant population comparing the nonstress test with umbilical artery Doppler velocimetry: A randomized controlled clinical trial

被引:46
|
作者
Williams, KP
Farquharson, DF
Bebbington, M
Danscreau, J
Galerneau, F
Wilson, RD
Shaw, D
Kent, N
机构
[1] Yale Univ, Sch Med, Dept Obstet & Gynecol, New Haven, CT 06510 USA
[2] Univ British Columbia, BC Womens Hosp, Diagnost & Ambulatory Program, Vancouver, BC V5Z 1M9, Canada
[3] Montefiore Med Ctr, Albert Einstein Coll Med, Dept Obstet & Gynecol, Bronx, NY 10467 USA
[4] Montefiore Med Ctr, Albert Einstein Coll Med, Dept Womens Hlth, Bronx, NY 10467 USA
[5] Childrens Hosp Philadelphia, Ctr Fetal Diagnosis & Treatment, Philadelphia, PA 19104 USA
关键词
umbilical artery Doppler; nonstress test; antepartum fetal monitoring;
D O I
10.1067/mob.2003.305
中图分类号
R71 [妇产科学];
学科分类号
100211 ;
摘要
OBJECTIVE: The purpose of this study was to evaluate the ability of two different modes of antepartum fetal testing to screen for the presence of peripartum morbidity, as measured by the cesarean delivery rate for fetal distress in labor. STUDY DESIGN: Over a 36-month period, all patients who were referred to the Fetal Assessment Unit at BC Women's Hospital because of a perceived increased fetal antepartum risk at a gestational age of greater than or equal to32 weeks of gestation were approached to participate in this study. Fetal surveillance of these women was allocated randomly to either umbilical artery Doppler ultrasound testing or nonstress testing as a screening test for fetal well-being. If either the umbilical artery Doppler testing or the nonstress testing was normal, patients were screened subsequently with the same technique, according to study protocol. When the Doppler study showed a systolic/diastolic ratio of >90th percentile or the nonstress testing was equivocal (ie, variable decelerations), an amniotic fluid index was performed, as an additional screening test. When the amniotic fluid index was abnormal (<5th percentile), induction and delivery were recommended. When the Doppler study showed absent or reversed diastolic blood flow or when the nonstress test result was abnormal, induction and delivery were recommended to the attending physician. Statistical comparisons between groups were performed with an unpaired t test for normally distributed continuous variables and chi(2) test for categoric variables. RESULTS: One thousand three hundred sixty patients were assigned randomly to groups in the study; 16 patients were lost to follow up. Six hundred forty-nine patients received Doppler testing and 691 received nonstress testing. The mean number of visits for the Doppler test and nonstress test groups was two versus two, respectively. The major indications for fetal assessment included postdates (43%), decreased fetal movement (22%), diabetes mellitus (11%), hypertension (10%), and intrauterine growth restriction (7%). The incidence of cesarean delivery for fetal distress was significantly lower in the Doppler group compared with the nonstress testing group (30 [4.6%] vs 60 [8.7%], respectively; P < .006). The greatest impact on the reduction in cesarean deliveries for fetal distress was seen in the subgroups in which the indication for testing was hypertension and suspected intrauterine growth restriction. CONCLUSION: Umbilical artery,Doppler as a screening test for fetal well-being in a high-risk population was associated with a decreased incidence of cesarean delivery for fetal distress compared to the nonstress testing, with no increase in neonatal morbidity.
引用
收藏
页码:1366 / 1371
页数:6
相关论文
共 48 条
  • [1] A CONTROLLED TRIAL OF SELF NONSTRESS TEST VERSUS ASSISTED NONSTRESS TEST IN THE EVALUATION OF FETAL WELL-BEING
    REECE, EA
    HAGAY, Z
    GAROFALO, J
    HOBBINS, JC
    [J]. AMERICAN JOURNAL OF OBSTETRICS AND GYNECOLOGY, 1992, 166 (02) : 489 - 492
  • [2] Umbilical artery Doppler velocimetry: Clinical utility in high-risk pregnancies
    Divon, MY
    [J]. AMERICAN JOURNAL OF OBSTETRICS AND GYNECOLOGY, 1996, 174 (01) : 10 - 14
  • [3] Comparing Non-Stress Test versus Umbilical Artery Doppler Velocimetry among Aample of High-risk Pregnant Women in Erbil City
    Hamad, Rand Noori
    Zangana, Jwan Mohammed Sabir
    [J]. BANGLADESH JOURNAL OF MEDICAL SCIENCE, 2023, 22 : S10 - S17
  • [4] A randomized controlled trial of a new fetal acoustic stimulation test for fetal well-being
    Marden, D
    McDuffie, RS
    Allen, R
    Abitz, D
    [J]. AMERICAN JOURNAL OF OBSTETRICS AND GYNECOLOGY, 1997, 176 (06) : 1386 - 1388
  • [5] UMBILICAL ARTERY RESISTANCE INDEX AS A SCREENING-TEST FOR FETAL WELL-BEING .2. RANDOMIZED FEASIBILITY STUDY
    HOFMEYR, GJ
    PATTINSON, R
    BUCKLEY, D
    JENNINGS, J
    REDMAN, CWG
    [J]. OBSTETRICS AND GYNECOLOGY, 1991, 78 (03): : 359 - 362
  • [6] UMBILICAL ARTERY DOPPLER VELOCIMETRY VS THE NONSTRESS TEST AS A PREDICTOR OF POOR OUTCOME IN HIGH-RISK PREGNANCIES - OLIGOHYDRAMNIOS VS NORMAL AMNIOTIC-FLUID
    WAX, JR
    PAINE, LL
    CALLAN, NA
    GEGOR, CL
    JOHNSON, TRB
    [J]. JOURNAL OF MATERNAL-FETAL INVESTIGATION, 1993, 3 (02): : 105 - 108
  • [7] THE DIAGNOSTIC VALUES OF CONCURRENT NONSTRESS TESTING, AMNIOTIC-FLUID MEASUREMENT, AND DOPPLER VELOCIMETRY IN SCREENING A GENERAL HIGH-RISK POPULATION
    DEVOE, LD
    GARDNER, P
    DEAR, C
    CASTILLO, RA
    [J]. AMERICAN JOURNAL OF OBSTETRICS AND GYNECOLOGY, 1990, 163 (03) : 1040 - 1048
  • [8] UMBILICAL ARTERY RESISTANCE INDEX AS A SCREENING-TEST FOR FETAL WELL-BEING .1. PROSPECTIVE REVEALED EVALUATION
    PATTINSON, R
    DAWES, G
    JENNINGS, J
    REDMAN, C
    [J]. OBSTETRICS AND GYNECOLOGY, 1991, 78 (03): : 353 - 358
  • [9] DOPPLER WAVE-FORM PATTERNS OF THE UMBILICAL ARTERY - SCREENING-TEST FOR HIGH-RISK PREGNANCIES
    MULLICK, S
    KUSHTAGI, P
    SWAIN, UK
    RAO, K
    MURALIDHAR, BG
    [J]. INTERNATIONAL JOURNAL OF GYNECOLOGY & OBSTETRICS, 1993, 40 (02) : 115 - 118
  • [10] Frequency of third trimester umbilical artery Doppler for improving neonatal outcomes in high-risk pregnancies: a randomized trial
    Salama, Mohamed Hamed
    Rizk, Hanan Hanna
    Nawara, Maii
    [J]. OBSTETRICS & GYNECOLOGY SCIENCE, 2023, 66 (03) : 161 - 168