Di Mascio Daniele, Rizzo Giuseppe, Buca Danilo, D'Amico Alice, Leombroni Martina, Tinari Sara, Giancotti Antonella, Muzii Ludovico, Nappi Luigi, Liberati Marco, D'Antonio Francesco
Department of Maternal and Child Health and Urological Sciences, Sapienza University of Rome, Italy.
Università di Roma Tor Vergata, Division of Maternal Fetal Medicine, Ospedale Cristo Re, Rome, Italy; The First I.M. Sechenov Moscow State Medical University, Department of Obstetrics and Gynecology, Moscow, Russia.
Eur J Obstet Gynecol Reprod Biol. 2020 Sep;252:439-443. doi: 10.1016/j.ejogrb.2020.07.032. Epub 2020 Jul 24.
Cerebroplacental ratio (CPR) has been associated with adverse perinatal outcome irrespective of fetal weight. More recently, it has been proposed that the ratio between umbilical and middle cerebral artery pulsatility index, the umbilicocerebral ratio (UCR) had a higher diagnostic accuracy compared to CPR in predicting adverse outcome. The aim of the study was to compare the diagnostic accuracy of CPR and UCR in predicting adverse perinatal outcome in the third trimester of pregnancy.
Secondary analysis of prospective study carried out in a dedicated research ultrasound clinic in a single tertiary referral center over a one-year period. Inclusion criteria were consecutive singleton pregnancies between 36 + 0 and 37 + 6 weeks of gestation. Exclusion criteria were multiple gestations, pregnancies affected by structural or chromosomal anomalies, maternal medical complications or drugs intake and abnormal Doppler waveform in the UA, defined as PI>95th or absent/end diastolic flow. All women were pre-screened at 28-32 weeks of gestation in order to rule out signs of early fetal growth restriction. The primary outcome was to compare the diagnostic performance of CPR and UCR in detecting the presence of fetuses affected by a composite adverse outcome.
Mean CPR (1.35 ± 0.39 vs 1.85 ± 0.58, p < 0.001) was significantly lower while mean UCR (0.78 ± 0.25 vs 0.58 ± 0.20, p = 0.001) was significantly higher in pregnancies experiencing compared to those not experiencing composite adverse outcome. There was no difference between CPR and UCR in predicting adverse perinatal outcome in the third trimester of pregnancy and both showed a very low diagnostic accuracy. CPR had an AUC of 0.51 (95 % CI 0.43-0.58) while UCR had an AUC of 0.51 (95 % CI 0.43-0.58) in predicting composite adverse outcome. Likewise, there was no difference in the diagnostic accuracy of CRP (AUC: 0.600, 95 % CI 0.36-0.83) and UCR (AUC: 0.589, 95 % CI 0.35-0.83) when considering only SGA fetuses.
A low CPR and a high UCR are significantly associated with adverse perinatal outcome in singleton pregnancies at term. There was no difference between CPR and UCR in predicting perinatal outcome. Despite this, the diagnostic accuracy of both these parameters is too poor to advocate for their use as a screening tool of perinatal impairment at term, unless specific indications, such as SGA or FGR, have been identified.
无论胎儿体重如何,脑胎盘比率(CPR)都与不良围产期结局相关。最近,有人提出脐动脉与大脑中动脉搏动指数之比,即脐脑比率(UCR),在预测不良结局方面比CPR具有更高的诊断准确性。本研究的目的是比较CPR和UCR在预测妊娠晚期不良围产期结局方面的诊断准确性。
对在一个单一的三级转诊中心的专门研究超声诊所进行的为期一年的前瞻性研究进行二次分析。纳入标准为妊娠36 + 0至37 + 6周的连续单胎妊娠。排除标准为多胎妊娠、受结构或染色体异常影响的妊娠、母亲的医疗并发症或药物摄入以及脐动脉多普勒波形异常,定义为搏动指数(PI)>第95百分位数或舒张末期血流缺失/消失。所有女性在妊娠28 - 32周时进行了预筛查,以排除早期胎儿生长受限的迹象。主要结局是比较CPR和UCR在检测受复合不良结局影响的胎儿方面的诊断性能。
与未经历复合不良结局的妊娠相比,经历复合不良结局的妊娠的平均CPR(1.35 ± 0.39 vs 1.85 ± 0.58,p < 0.001)显著更低,而平均UCR(0.78 ± 0.25 vs 0.58 ± 0.20,p = 0.001)显著更高。在预测妊娠晚期不良围产期结局方面,CPR和UCR之间没有差异,且两者的诊断准确性都非常低。在预测复合不良结局方面,CPR的曲线下面积(AUC)为0.51(95%可信区间0.43 - 0.58),而UCR的AUC为0.51(95%可信区间0.43 - 0.58)。同样,仅考虑小于胎龄儿(SGA)胎儿时,CPR(AUC:0.600,95%可信区间0.36 - 0.83)和UCR(AUC:0.589,95%可信区间0.35 - 0.83)的诊断准确性没有差异。
足月单胎妊娠中,低CPR和高UCR与不良围产期结局显著相关。在预测围产期结局方面,CPR和UCR之间没有差异。尽管如此,这两个参数的诊断准确性都太差,无法主张将其用作足月围产期损害的筛查工具,除非已确定有特定指征,如SGA或胎儿生长受限(FGR)。