Chauhan Suneet P, Doherty Dorota D, Magann Everett F, Cahanding Francis, Moreno Frank, Klausen Jack H
Division of Maternal-Fetal Medicine, Regional Women's Health Care, Spartanburg Regional Medical Center, 853 N. Church Street, Spartanburg, SC 29303, USA.
Am J Obstet Gynecol. 2004 Aug;191(2):661-7; discussion 667-8. doi: 10.1016/j.ajog.2004.06.078.
The purpose of this study was to determine the superior technique, if either, of the amniotic fluid index (AFI) vs the single deepest pocket technique in predicting an adverse pregnancy outcome among high-risk patients undergoing antenatal testing.
Patients having modified biophysical profile (nonstress test plus sonographic estimation of amniotic fluid) were randomized to either have AFI or determination of the presence or absence of a 2 x 1-cm single deepest pocket.
Between January of 1997 and December of 2001, 1080 women were randomized with 530 women in the AFI arm, and 558 in the 2 x 1 pocket arm. The maternal demographics and prenatal complications were similar between groups. Significantly more patients were identified as having oligohydramnios using AFI (17%) compared with using 2 x 1 pocket (10%) ( P =.002). The overall rate of cesarean section for nonreassuring fetal heart rate (FHR) tracing was 3.8% (30 cases, with 16 cases in the AFI-monitored, and 14 cases in the 2 x 1 pocket-monitored groups, respectively, P =.608). Logistic regression analysis showed no difference between the groups with respect to the ability to identify patients who underwent cesarean section for nonreassuring FHR tracing during labor ( P =.999). The umbilical artery pH <7.1 ( P =.688) and admission to the newborn intensive care unit were also comparable between groups.
During antepartum fetal surveillance, use of single deepest pocket compared with amniotic fluid index is associated with a significantly lower rate of suspected oligohydramnios.
本研究旨在确定在对接受产前检查的高危患者进行妊娠结局预测时,羊水指数(AFI)法与单一最大羊水池深度法这两种方法中哪种更为优越。
将接受改良生物物理评分(无应激试验加羊水超声评估)的患者随机分组,一组采用AFI法,另一组确定是否存在一个2×1厘米的单一最大羊水池。
在1997年1月至2001年12月期间,1080名女性被随机分组,其中530名女性被分入AFI组,558名女性被分入2×1厘米羊水池组。两组之间的产妇人口统计学特征和产前并发症相似。与使用2×1厘米羊水池法(10%)相比,使用AFI法被判定为羊水过少的患者显著更多(17%)(P = 0.002)。因胎儿心率(FHR)监护情况不佳而行剖宫产的总体发生率为3.8%(30例,AFI监测组16例,2×1厘米羊水池监测组14例,P = 0.608)。逻辑回归分析显示,两组在识别分娩期间因FHR监护情况不佳而行剖宫产患者的能力方面没有差异(P = 0.999)。两组之间脐动脉pH < 7.1(P = 0.688)及新生儿重症监护病房收治情况也相当。
在产前胎儿监护期间,与羊水指数法相比,使用单一最大羊水池深度法可使疑似羊水过少的发生率显著降低。