Umbilical–portal–systemic venous shunt and intrauterine growth restriction: an inquiry from a prospective study

医学 胎儿 宫内生长受限 胎龄 产科 前瞻性队列研究 静脉导管 妊娠期 小于胎龄 怀孕 人口 外科 遗传学 环境卫生 生物
作者
Shelly Czeiger,Tal Weissbach,Keren Zloto,Ariella Wiener,Omer Nir,A. Massarwa,Boaz Weisz,Michal Fishel Bartal,Rakefet Yoeli Ulman,Yossi Bart,R. Achiron,Z. Kivilevitch,Shali Mazaki‐Tovi,Eran Kassif
出处
期刊:American Journal of Obstetrics and Gynecology [Elsevier BV]
卷期号:231 (3): 340.e1-340.e16 被引量:3
标识
DOI:10.1016/j.ajog.2024.01.003
摘要

Background The investigation of the fetal umbilical–portal venous system is based on the premise that congenital anomalies of this system may be related to adverse perinatal outcomes. Several small retrospective studies have reported an association between umbilical–portal–systemic venous shunts and intrauterine growth restriction. However, the prevalence of portosystemic shunts in the fetal growth restricted population is yet to be determined. Objective The aims of this study were (1) to determine the prevalence of fetal umbilical–portal–systemic venous shunts in pregnancies complicated by intrauterine growth restriction and (2) to compare the perinatal and neonatal outcomes of pregnancies with intrauterine growth restriction with and without umbilical–portal–systemic venous shunts. Study Design This was a prospective, cross-sectional study of pregnancies diagnosed with intrauterine growth restriction, as defined by the Society for Maternal-Fetal Medicine intrauterine growth restriction guidelines. All participants underwent a detailed anomaly scan, supplemented with a targeted scan of the fetal portal system. Venous shunts were diagnosed using color Doppler mode. The perinatal outcomes of pregnancies with intrauterine growth restriction with and without umbilical–portal–systemic venous shunts were compared. Results A total of 150 cases with intrauterine growth restriction were recruited. The prevalence of umbilical–portal–systemic venous shunts in our cohort was 9.3% (n=14). When compared with the control group (intrauterine growth restriction without umbilical–portal–systemic venous shunts, n=136), the study group had a significantly lower mean gestational age at the time of intrauterine growth restriction diagnosis (29.7±5.6 vs 32.47±4.6 weeks of gestation; P=.036) and an earlier gestational age at delivery (33.50±6.0 vs 36.13±2.8; P=.005). The study group had a higher rate of fetal death (21.4% vs 0.7%; P<.001) and, accordingly, a lower rate of live births (71.4% vs 95.6%; P=.001). Additional associated fetal vascular anomalies were significantly more prevalent in the study group than in the control group (35.7% vs 4.4%; P≤.001). The rate of other associated anomalies was similar. The study group had a significantly lower rate of abnormal uterine artery Doppler indices (0% vs 40.4%; P=.011) and a higher rate of abnormal ductus venosus Doppler indices (64.3% vs 23%; P=.001). There were no cases of hypertensive disorders of pregnancy in the study group, whereas the control group had an incidence of 12.5% (P=.16). Other perinatal and neonatal outcomes were comparable. Conclusion Umbilical–portal–systemic venous shunt is a relatively common finding among fetuses with growth restriction. When compared with pregnancies with intrauterine growth restriction with a normal portal system, these pregnancies complicated by intrauterine growth restriction and an umbilical–portal–systemic venous shunt are associated with a different Doppler flow pattern, an increased risk for fetal death, earlier presentation of intrauterine growth restriction, a lower gestational age at delivery, additional congenital vascular anomalies, and a lower rate of pregnancy-induced hypertensive disorders. Meticulous sonographic evaluation of the portal system should be considered in the prenatal workup of intrauterine growth restriction, as umbilical–portal–systemic venous shunts may affect perinatal outcomes. The investigation of the fetal umbilical–portal venous system is based on the premise that congenital anomalies of this system may be related to adverse perinatal outcomes. Several small retrospective studies have reported an association between umbilical–portal–systemic venous shunts and intrauterine growth restriction. However, the prevalence of portosystemic shunts in the fetal growth restricted population is yet to be determined. The aims of this study were (1) to determine the prevalence of fetal umbilical–portal–systemic venous shunts in pregnancies complicated by intrauterine growth restriction and (2) to compare the perinatal and neonatal outcomes of pregnancies with intrauterine growth restriction with and without umbilical–portal–systemic venous shunts. This was a prospective, cross-sectional study of pregnancies diagnosed with intrauterine growth restriction, as defined by the Society for Maternal-Fetal Medicine intrauterine growth restriction guidelines. All participants underwent a detailed anomaly scan, supplemented with a targeted scan of the fetal portal system. Venous shunts were diagnosed using color Doppler mode. The perinatal outcomes of pregnancies with intrauterine growth restriction with and without umbilical–portal–systemic venous shunts were compared. A total of 150 cases with intrauterine growth restriction were recruited. The prevalence of umbilical–portal–systemic venous shunts in our cohort was 9.3% (n=14). When compared with the control group (intrauterine growth restriction without umbilical–portal–systemic venous shunts, n=136), the study group had a significantly lower mean gestational age at the time of intrauterine growth restriction diagnosis (29.7±5.6 vs 32.47±4.6 weeks of gestation; P=.036) and an earlier gestational age at delivery (33.50±6.0 vs 36.13±2.8; P=.005). The study group had a higher rate of fetal death (21.4% vs 0.7%; P<.001) and, accordingly, a lower rate of live births (71.4% vs 95.6%; P=.001). Additional associated fetal vascular anomalies were significantly more prevalent in the study group than in the control group (35.7% vs 4.4%; P≤.001). The rate of other associated anomalies was similar. The study group had a significantly lower rate of abnormal uterine artery Doppler indices (0% vs 40.4%; P=.011) and a higher rate of abnormal ductus venosus Doppler indices (64.3% vs 23%; P=.001). There were no cases of hypertensive disorders of pregnancy in the study group, whereas the control group had an incidence of 12.5% (P=.16). Other perinatal and neonatal outcomes were comparable. Umbilical–portal–systemic venous shunt is a relatively common finding among fetuses with growth restriction. When compared with pregnancies with intrauterine growth restriction with a normal portal system, these pregnancies complicated by intrauterine growth restriction and an umbilical–portal–systemic venous shunt are associated with a different Doppler flow pattern, an increased risk for fetal death, earlier presentation of intrauterine growth restriction, a lower gestational age at delivery, additional congenital vascular anomalies, and a lower rate of pregnancy-induced hypertensive disorders. Meticulous sonographic evaluation of the portal system should be considered in the prenatal workup of intrauterine growth restriction, as umbilical–portal–systemic venous shunts may affect perinatal outcomes.
最长约 10秒,即可获得该文献文件

科研通智能强力驱动
Strongly Powered by AbleSci AI
科研通是完全免费的文献互助平台,具备全网最快的应助速度,最高的求助完成率。 对每一个文献求助,科研通都将尽心尽力,给求助人一个满意的交代。
实时播报
Language完成签到,获得积分10
1秒前
CYYDNDB完成签到 ,获得积分10
2秒前
杨华启完成签到,获得积分0
4秒前
xsss完成签到,获得积分10
4秒前
miku1完成签到,获得积分10
4秒前
源来是洲董完成签到,获得积分10
4秒前
调皮的天真完成签到 ,获得积分10
15秒前
16秒前
研友_VZGVzn完成签到,获得积分10
17秒前
鲤鱼灵阳完成签到,获得积分10
18秒前
kingwsws完成签到,获得积分10
20秒前
ssnwlp123完成签到,获得积分10
20秒前
korosi发布了新的文献求助10
20秒前
内向忆南完成签到,获得积分10
22秒前
小朱同学完成签到,获得积分10
25秒前
wbx完成签到,获得积分10
26秒前
KDVBHGJDFHGAV完成签到,获得积分0
27秒前
沐雨汐完成签到,获得积分10
28秒前
29秒前
205完成签到,获得积分10
31秒前
boss_astr完成签到,获得积分10
33秒前
Lny发布了新的文献求助10
33秒前
怕孤独的棒球完成签到,获得积分10
33秒前
Joseph_sss完成签到 ,获得积分10
34秒前
酷炫忆梅发布了新的文献求助10
37秒前
boss_phy完成签到,获得积分10
38秒前
fox完成签到 ,获得积分10
39秒前
缓慢的甜瓜完成签到,获得积分10
40秒前
要减肥的向露完成签到,获得积分10
41秒前
淡忘完成签到 ,获得积分10
42秒前
lin0u0完成签到,获得积分10
44秒前
烟花应助酷炫忆梅采纳,获得10
44秒前
kiddos3e完成签到,获得积分10
46秒前
coasting完成签到,获得积分10
47秒前
WULAVIVA完成签到,获得积分10
47秒前
qiaoxi完成签到,获得积分10
48秒前
wuju完成签到,获得积分10
49秒前
dingyushu完成签到,获得积分10
49秒前
成全完成签到,获得积分10
49秒前
50秒前
高分求助中
(应助此贴封号)【重要!!请各用户(尤其是新用户)详细阅读】【科研通的精品贴汇总】 10000
Applied Min-Max Approach to Missile Guidance and Control 5000
Metallurgy at high pressures and high temperatures 2000
Inorganic Chemistry Eighth Edition 1200
Anionic polymerization of acenaphthylene: identification of impurity species formed as by-products 1000
The Psychological Quest for Meaning 800
Signals, Systems, and Signal Processing 610
热门求助领域 (近24小时)
化学 材料科学 医学 生物 纳米技术 工程类 有机化学 化学工程 生物化学 计算机科学 物理 内科学 复合材料 催化作用 物理化学 光电子学 电极 细胞生物学 基因 无机化学
热门帖子
关注 科研通微信公众号,转发送积分 6325927
求助须知:如何正确求助?哪些是违规求助? 8142015
关于积分的说明 17071700
捐赠科研通 5378411
什么是DOI,文献DOI怎么找? 2854190
邀请新用户注册赠送积分活动 1831847
关于科研通互助平台的介绍 1683076