Placental biomarkers and fetoplacental Dopplers in combination reliably predict preterm birth in pregnancies complicated by fetal growth restriction.

OBJECTIVE: To assess the association between placental biomarkers (placental growth factor (PlGF) and soluble fms-like tyrosine kinase-1 (sFlt-1)/PlGF ratio) and fetoplacental Dopplers - Umbilical Artery Pulsatility Index (UA PI) and Uterine Artery Pulsatility Index (UtA PI) in various combinations for the likelihood of preterm birth (PTB) in women with fetal growth restriction (FGR). METHODS: A prospective cohort study of pregnancies complicated by FGR. Maternal serum PlGF levels, sFlt-1/PlGF ratio, UA PI and UtA PI were measured at 4-weekly intervals from recruitment to delivery. Harrell's concordance statistic was used to evaluate various combinations of placental biomarkers and fetoplacental Dopplers to ascertain the ideal combination to predict PTB (<37 weeks). Multivariable Cox regression was used as time-varying covariates. RESULTS: There were 320 pregnancies in the study cohort - 179 (55.9%) were FGR and 141 (44.1%) were AGA. In the FGR cohort, both low PlGF levels and elevated sFlt-1/PlGF ratio significantly affected time to PTB. Low PlGF was a better predictor of PTB than either sFlt-1/PlGF ratio or combination of PlGF and sFlt-1/PlGF ratio (Harrell's C 0.81, 0.79, 0.75 respectively). Similarly, although both UA PI and UtA PI >95th centile for gestation significantly affected the time to PTB, in combination, they were better predictors than either measure alone (Harrell's C 0.82, 0.75, 0.76 respectively). The predictive utility was highest when PlGF <100ng/L, UA PI and UtA PI >95th centile was combined (Harrell's C 0.88) (HR 32.99 95% CI 10.74, 101.32). CONCLUSIONS: Low maternal PlGF levels (<100ng/L) and abnormal fetoplacental Dopplers (UA PI and UtA PI >95th centile) in combination have greatest predictive utility for PTB in pregnancies complicated with FGR and may help guide clinical management of these complex pregnancies. This article is protected by copyright. All rights reserved.

Ultrasound-guided repositioning technique for partially expelled intrauterine device: descriptive feasibility study.

OBJECTIVE: To describe the feasibility of an ultrasound-guided repositioning technique for partially expelled intrauterine devices (IUDs) without use of sedation. METHODS: This was a descriptive feasibility study of patients with a partially expelled IUD managed in our outpatient clinic from January 2016 to February 2020. The partially expelled IUDs (vertical arm extending partially or entirely through the cervical canal) were repositioned at the uterine fundus using Hartmann alligator forceps under ultrasound guidance. Paracervical or intracervical anesthesia and prophylactic antibiotics were not used. Data related to the procedure and 6-month follow-up were extracted from patient medical records. The primary outcome was the success rate of the repositioning procedure, defined as ultrasound confirmation of the entire IUD located above the internal os. Secondary outcomes included the retention and expulsion rates of the repositioned IUD at 6 months after the procedure and description of complications. RESULTS: We included data from 55 women with a partially expelled IUD (35 levonorgestrel IUDs and 20 copper IUDs) referred for repositioning. Ultrasound-guided repositioning of the IUD was successful in 51 (92.7%) cases, while the procedure was not completed in four patients due to pain. Of the 55 procedures, 48 (87.3%) were performed by obstetrics and gynecology trainees under the supervision of a senior specialist. Among the 51 successfully repositioned IUDs, nine (17.6%) were expelled within 6 months after the procedure and six patients were lost to follow-up. No uterine perforation or infection-related complications occurred within 6 months of the procedure. CONCLUSION: The ultrasound-guided repositioning technique appears to be a safe and feasible approach for partially expelled IUDs. © 2022 International Society of Ultrasound in Obstetrics and Gynecology.

Definitions matter: detection rates and perinatal outcome for infants classified prenatally as having late fetal growth restriction using SMFM biometric vs ISUOG/Delphi consensus criteria.

OBJECTIVES: Fetal growth restriction (FGR) is often secondary to placental dysfunction and is suspected prenatally based on biometric or circulatory abnormalities detected on ultrasound. The aims of this study were to compare the screening performance of the Society for Maternal-Fetal Medicine (SMFM) biometric criteria (estimated fetal weight (EFW) or abdominal circumference (AC) < 10th centile) with that of the International Society of Ultrasound in Obstetrics and Gynecology (ISUOG)-endorsed Delphi consensus criteria for late FGR for delivery of a small-for-gestational-age (SGA) infant at term, emergency Cesarean section (CS) for non-reassuring fetal status (NRFS), perinatal mortality and composite severe neonatal morbidity. METHODS: We classified retrospectively non-anomalous singleton infants as having late FGR (diagnosed ≥ 32 weeks) according to SMFM and ISUOG/Delphi criteria in a cohort of women who had been referred to the Mater Mother's Hospital, Brisbane, Australia and who delivered at term between January 2014 and December 2020. The study outcomes were delivery of a SGA infant (birth weight (BW) < 10th or < 3rd centile), emergency CS for NRFS, perinatal mortality (defined as stillbirth or neonatal death within 28 days of a live birth) and a composite of severe neonatal morbidity. We assessed the screening performance of various ultrasound variables by calculating the sensitivity, specificity, positive (PPV) and negative (NPV) predictive values, false-positive and false-negative rates, positive likelihood ratio (LR+) and negative likelihood ratio. RESULTS: The SMFM and ISUOG/Delphi consensus criteria collectively classified 1030 cases as having late FGR. Of these, 400 cases were classified by both SMFM and ISUOG/Delphi criteria, whilst 548 cases were classified using only SMFM criteria and 82 cases were classified only by ISUOG/Delphi criteria. Prenatal detection of late FGR by SMFM and ISUOG/Delphi criteria was associated with increased odds of delivery of an infant with BW < 10th centile (SMFM: adjusted odds ratio (aOR), 133.0 (95% CI, 94.7-186.6); ISUOG/Delphi: aOR, 69.5 (95% CI, 49.1-98.2)) or BW < 3rd centile (SMFM: aOR, 348.7 (95% CI, 242.6-501.2); ISUOG/Delphi: aOR, 215.4 (95% CI, 148.4-312.7)). Compared with the SMFM criteria, the ISUOG/Delphi criteria were associated with lower odds (aOR, 0.5 (95% CI, 0.3-0.8)) of predicting a SGA infant with BW < 10th centile, but higher odds of predicting emergency CS for NRFS (aOR, 2.30 (95% CI, 1.14-4.66)) and composite neonatal morbidity (aOR, 1.22 (95% CI, 1.05-1.41)). Both SMFM and ISUOG/Delphi criteria were associated with high LR+, specificity, PPV and NPV for the prediction of infants with BW < 10th and BW < 3rd centile. However, both methods functioned much less efficiently for the prediction of composite severe neonatal morbidity or emergency CS for NRFS, with LR+ < 10. The SMFM biometric criteria alone, particularly AC < 3rd centile, had the highest LR+ values for the prediction of perinatal mortality. CONCLUSION: Both the SMFM and ISUOG/Delphi criteria had strong screening potential for the detection of infants with BW < 10th or < 3rd centile but not for adverse neonatal outcome. © 2022 The Authors. Ultrasound in Obstetrics & Gynecology published by John Wiley & Sons Ltd on behalf of International Society of Ultrasound in Obstetrics and Gynecology.

Comparison of circulating total sFLT-1 to placental-specific sFLT-1 e15a in women with suspected preeclampsia.

INTRODUCTION: Soluble fms-like tyrosine kinase 1 (sFLT-1), a circulating anti-angiogenic factor that binds and antagonizes placental growth factor (PlGF), appears key to preeclamptic pathophysiology. Two main sFLT-1 splice variants exist: sFLT-1 e15a and sFLT-1 i13. Total sFLT-1/PlGF ratios are increasingly used clinically; we explore whether using placental-specific sFLT-1 e15a improves test performance compared with total sFLT-1 in preeclampsia diagnosis. METHODS: Consent was obtained for serum sampling from 96 women with suspected preeclampsia. Total sFLT-1 and PlGF were quantified using the B.R.A.H.M.S Kryptor Compact Plus automated immunoassay platform, and sFLT-1 e15a by custom enzyme-linked immunosorbent assay. Test performance was then assessed by subsequent diagnosis. RESULTS: Of 96 participants, 32 did not develop preeclampsia, 32 had early-onset (<34 weeks') disease and 32 had late-onset (≥34 weeks') disease. In those with preeclampsia, median sFLT-1 and sFLT-1 e15a were significantly increased (7361.0 vs 2463.0 pg/mL, and 946.6 vs 305.4 ng/mL respectively; p < 0.001 for both), and PlGF significantly reduced (43.5 vs 154.4 pg/mL; p < 0.001) compared to those without preeclampsia. Those with early-onset, compared to late-onset, preeclampsia chiefly had lower median PlGF levels (16.0 vs 57.3; p < 0.001), which contributed to higher sFLT-1/PlGF and sFLT-1 e15a/PlGF ratios (830.1 vs 86.7, and 109258.9 vs 12608.7 respectively; p < 0.001 for both). DISCUSSION: sFLT-1 e15a performs comparably to total sFLT-1 in women with suspected preeclampsia, however with higher translational burden. Our results support the expanding clinical use of the sFLT-1/PlGF ratio in suspected preeclampsia, particularly early-onset, to assist with disease diagnosis.

Role of placental, fetal and maternal cardiovascular markers in predicting adverse outcome in women with suspected or confirmed pre-eclampsia.

OBJECTIVE: To assess the performance of placental, fetal and maternal cardiovascular markers in the prediction of adverse perinatal and maternal outcomes in women with suspected or confirmed pre-eclampsia. METHODS: This was a prospective prognostic accuracy study of women with suspected or confirmed pre-eclampsia who underwent a series of investigations to measure maternal hemodynamic indices, mean arterial pressure, augmentation index, ophthalmic artery peak systolic velocity (PSV) ratio, uterine artery pulsatility index (UtA-PI), fetal biometric and Doppler parameters, soluble fms-like tyrosine kinase-1 (sFlt-1) and placental growth factor (PlGF). The performance of these markers, individually or in combination, in predicting adverse perinatal and maternal outcomes was then assessed using receiver-operating-characteristics (ROC)-curve analysis. Adverse maternal outcome was defined as one or more of severe hypertension, admission to the intensive care unit, eclampsia, placental abruption, HELLP syndrome, disseminated intravascular coagulation, platelets < 100 × 109 /L, creatinine > 90 µmol/L and alanine aminotransferase > 100 U/L. Adverse perinatal outcome was defined as one or more of preterm birth at or before 34 + 0 weeks, neonatal intensive care unit admission for > 48 h, respiratory distress syndrome, intraventricular hemorrhage, hypoxic ischemic encephalopathy, necrotizing enterocolitis, retinopathy of prematurity and confirmed fetal infection. RESULTS: We recruited 126 women with suspected (n = 31) or confirmed (n = 95) pre-eclampsia at a median gestational age of 33.9 weeks (interquartile range, 30.9-36.3 weeks). Pregnancies with adverse perinatal outcome compared to those without had a higher median UtA-PI (1.3 vs 0.8; P < 0.001), ophthalmic artery PSV ratio (0.8 vs 0.7; P = 0.01) and umbilical artery PI percentile (82.0 vs 68.5; P < 0.01) and lower median estimated fetal weight percentile (4.0 vs 43.0; P < 0.001), abdominal circumference percentile (4.0 vs 63.0; P < 0.001), middle cerebral artery PI percentile (28.0 vs 58.5; P < 0.001) and cerebroplacental ratio percentile (18.0 vs 46.5; P < 0.001). Pregnancies with adverse perinatal outcome also had a higher median sFlt-1 (8208.0 pg/mL vs 4508.0 pg/mL; P < 0.001), lower PlGF (27.2 pg/mL vs 76.3 pg/mL; P < 0.001) and a higher sFlt-1/PlGF ratio (445.4 vs 74.4; P < 0.001). The best performing individual marker for predicting adverse perinatal outcome was the sFlt-1/PlGF ratio (area under the ROC curve (AUC), 0.87 (95% CI, 0.81-0.93)), followed by estimated fetal weight (AUC, 0.81 (95% CI, 0.73-0.89)). Women who experienced adverse maternal outcome had a higher median sFlt-1 level (7471.0 pg/mL vs 5131.0 pg/mL; P < 0.001) and sFlt-1/PlGF ratio (204.3 vs 93.3; P < 0.001) and a lower PlGF level (37.0 pg/mL vs 66.1 pg/mL; P = 0.01) and estimated fetal weight percentile (16.5 vs 37.0; P = 0.04). All markers performed poorly in predicting adverse maternal outcome, with sFlt-1 (AUC, 0.69 (95% CI, 0.60-0.79)) and sFlt-1/PlGF ratio (AUC, 0.69 (95% CI, 0.59-0.78)) demonstrating the best individual performance. The addition of cardiovascular, fetal or other placental indices to the sFlt-1/PlGF ratio did not improve the prediction of adverse maternal or perinatal outcomes. CONCLUSIONS: The sFlt-1/PlGF ratio performs well in predicting adverse perinatal outcomes but is a poor predictor of adverse maternal outcomes in women with suspected or diagnosed pre-eclampsia. The addition of cardiovascular or fetal indices to the model is unlikely to improve the prognostic performance of the sFlt-1/PlGF ratio. © 2022 International Society of Ultrasound in Obstetrics and Gynecology.

Efficacy and safety of expectant management in the treatment of tubal ectopic pregnancy: a systematic review and meta-analysis.

STUDY QUESTION: Is expectant management (EM) of tubal ectopic pregnancy (EP) an effective and safe treatment strategy when compared to alternative interventions? SUMMARY ANSWER: There is insufficient evidence to conclude EM yields a difference in the resolution of tubal EP, the avoidance of surgery or time to resolution of tubal EP when compared to intramuscular methotrexate in stable patients with ß-hCG <1500 IU/l. WHAT IS ALREADY KNOWN: The utilisation of medical and surgical management for EP is well established. EM aims to allow spontaneous resolution of the EP without intervention. STUDY DESIGN SIZE AND DURATION: We performed a systematic review and meta-analysis, searching Ovid MEDLINE, Embase, PsycINFO, CINAHL, Web of Science, OpenGrey.eu, Google Scholar, cross-referencing citations and trial registries to 15 December 2019. There were no limitations placed on language or publication date. Search terms included tubal EP and EM as well as variations of these terms. PARTICIPANTS/MATERIALS SETTING AND METHOD: We considered studies that included patients with tubal EP, EM as a comparator, and that were randomised controlled trials (RCTs). The primary outcome was resolution of tubal EP. Secondary outcomes included avoidance of surgery and the time to resolution of EP. Two reviewers independently selected the studies, assessed bias and extracted data. Relative risk (RR) and mean difference with 95% CI were assessed using a random effects model. The certainty of evidence was scored according to Grading of Recommendations Assessment, Development and Evaluation guidelines. MAIN RESULTS AND THE ROLE OF CHANCE: In total, 920 studies were screened. Five studies were eligible for inclusion in the systematic review. Two RCTs comparing methotrexate to EM were identified as being eligible for inclusion in meta-analysis. No RCTs comparing surgery to EM were identified. Compared with EM, there was insufficient evidence that methotrexate yields a difference on resolution of tubal EP (RR 1.04, 95% CI 0.88-1.23, P = 0.67; two RCTs, moderate-certainty evidence), avoiding surgery (RR 1.10, 95% CI 0.94-1.29, P = 0.25; two RCTs, low-certainty evidence) or the time to resolution of tubal EP (-2.56 days (favouring EM), 95% CI -7.93-2.80, P = 0.35; two RCTs, low-certainty evidence). LIMITATIONS REASONS FOR CAUTION: Only two RCTs with a total of 103 patients were eligible for inclusion in this meta-analysis. Further RCTs comparing EM to medical and surgical management are needed and these should also report adverse events. Patient preference should also be evaluated. WIDER IMPLICATIONS OF THE FINDINGS: We found insufficient evidence of differences in terms of resolution, avoidance of surgery and time to resolution between expectant and medical management. Given the imprecision in the effect estimates as demonstrated by the wide CIs, resulting in the downgrading of certainty of evidence for all outcomes in this meta-analysis, larger RCTs comparing interventions for tubal EP are needed. Caution should be exercised when trying to decide between EM and methotrexate to treat tubal EP. STUDY FUNDING/COMPETING INTERESTS: There was no funding for this study. NICM receives funding from various sources; none specifically supported this research. M.L. reports grants from Australian Women and Children's Research Foundation, outside the submitted work. M.A.: As a medical research institute, NICM Health Research Institute receives research grants and donations from foundations, universities, government agencies and industry. Sponsors and donors provide untied and tied funding for work to advance the vision and mission of the Institute. This systematic review was not specifically supported by donor or sponsor funding to NICM. M.A. reports a partnership grant with Metagenetics outside the submitted work. G.C. reports grants from Australian Women and Children's Research Foundation, personal fees from Roche and GE Healthcare, outside the submitted work. The remaining authors report no conflicts of interest. PROSPERO REGISTRATION NUMBER: CRD42020142736.

Second- and third-trimester serum levels of growth-differentiation factor-15 in prediction of pre-eclampsia.

OBJECTIVE: Pre-eclampsia (PE) is a significant contributor to adverse maternal and perinatal outcome; however, accurate prediction and early diagnosis of this condition remain a challenge. The aim of this study was to compare serum levels of growth-differentiation factor-15 (GDF-15) at three different gestational ages between asymptomatic women who subsequently developed preterm or term PE and healthy controls. METHODS: This was a case-control study drawn from a prospective observational study on adverse pregnancy outcomes in women attending for their routine second- and third-trimester hospital visits. Serum GDF-15 was determined in 300 samples using a commercial GDF-15 enzyme-linked immunosorbent assay: 120 samples at 19-24 weeks of gestation, 120 samples at 30-34 weeks and 60 samples at 35-37 weeks. Multiple linear regression was applied to logarithmically transformed GDF-15 control values to evaluate the influence of gestational age at blood sampling and maternal characteristics on GDF-15 results. GDF-15 multiples of the normal median (MoM) values, adjusted for gestational age and maternal characteristics, were compared between pregnancies that subsequently developed preterm or term PE and healthy controls. RESULTS: Values of GDF-15 increased with gestational age. There were no significant differences in GDF-15 MoM values between cases of preterm or term PE and normotensive pregnancies at 19-24 or 35-37 weeks of gestation. At 30-34 weeks, GDF-15 MoM values were significantly increased in cases of preterm PE, but not in those who later developed term PE. Elevated GDF-15 MoM values were associated significantly with a shorter interval between sampling at 30-34 weeks and delivery with PE (P = 0.005). CONCLUSION: Serum GDF-15 levels at 19-24 or 35-37 weeks of gestation are not predictive of preterm or term PE. At 30-34 weeks, GDF-15 levels are higher in women who subsequently develop preterm PE; however, this difference is small and GDF-15 is unlikely to be useful in clinical practice when used in isolation. Copyright © 2020 ISUOG. Published by John Wiley & Sons Ltd.

State-wide utilization and performance of traditional and cell-free DNA-based prenatal testing pathways: the Victorian Perinatal Record Linkage (PeRL) study.

OBJECTIVES: To perform individual record linkage of women undergoing screening with cell-free DNA (cfDNA), combined first-trimester screening (CFTS), second-trimester serum screening (STSS), and/or prenatal and postnatal cytogenetic testing with the aim to (1) obtain population-based estimates of utilization of prenatal screening and invasive diagnosis, (2) analyze the performance of different prenatal screening strategies, and (3) report the residual risk of any major chromosomal abnormality following a low-risk aneuploidy screening result. METHODS: This was a retrospective study of women residing in the state of Victoria, Australia, who underwent prenatal screening or invasive prenatal diagnosis in 2015. Patient-funded cfDNA referrals from multiple providers were merged with state-wide results for government-subsidized CFTS, STSS and invasive diagnostic procedures. Postnatal cytogenetic results from products of conception and infants up to 12 months of age were obtained to ascertain cases of false-negative screening results and atypical chromosomal abnormalities. Individual record linkage was performed using LinkageWizTM . RESULTS: During the study period, there were 79 140 births and 66 166 (83.6%) women underwent at least one form of aneuploidy screening. Linkage data were complete for 93.5% (n = 61 877) of women who underwent screening, and of these, 73.2% (n = 45 275) had CFTS alone, 20.2% (n = 12 486) had cfDNA alone; 5.3% (n = 3268) had STSS alone, 1.3% (n = 813) had both CFTS and cfDNA, and < 0.1% (n = 35) had both STSS and cfDNA. CFTS had a combined sensitivity for trisomies 21 (T21), 18 (T18) and 13 (T13) of 89.57% (95% CI, 82.64-93.93%) for a screen-positive rate (SPR) of 2.94%. There were 12 false-negative results in the CFTS pathway, comprising 10 cases of T21, one of T18 and one of T13. cfDNA had a combined sensitivity for T21, T18 and T13 of 100% (95% CI, 95.00-100%) for a SPR of 1.21%. When high-risk cfDNA results for any chromosome (including the sex chromosomes) and failed cfDNA tests were treated as screen positives, the SPR for cfDNA increased to 2.42%. The risk of any major chromosomal abnormality (including atypical abnormalities) detected on prenatal or postnatal diagnostic testing after a low-risk screening result was 1 in 1188 for CFTS (n = 37) and 1 in 762 for cfDNA (n = 16) (P = 0.13). The range of chromosomal abnormalities detected after a low-risk cfDNA result included pathogenic copy-number variants (n = 6), triploidy (n = 3), rare autosomal trisomies (n = 3) and monosomy X (n = 2). CONCLUSIONS: Our state-wide record-linkage analysis delineated the utilization and clinical performance of the multitude of prenatal screening pathways available to pregnant women. The sensitivity of cfDNA for T21, T18 and T13 was clearly superior to that of CFTS. While there was no statistically significant difference in the residual risk of any major chromosomal abnormality after a low-risk CFTS or cfDNA result, there were fewer live infants diagnosed with a major chromosomal abnormality in the cfDNA cohort. These data provide valuable population-based evidence to inform practice recommendations and health policies. Copyright © 2019 ISUOG. Published by John Wiley & Sons Ltd.

ISUOG Practice Guidelines: ultrasound assessment of fetal biometry and growth.

INTRODUCTION These Guidelines aim to describe appropriate assessment of fetal biometry and diagnosis of fetal growth disorders. These disorders consist mainly of fetal growth restriction (FGR), also referred to as intrauterine growth restriction (IUGR) and often associated with small­for­gestational age (SGA), and large­for­gestational age (LGA), which may lead to fetal macrosomia; both have been associated with a variety of adverse maternal and perinatal outcomes. Screening for, and adequate management of, fetal growth abnormalities are essential components of antenatal care, and fetal ultrasound plays a key role in assessment of these conditions. The fetal biometric parameters measured most commonly are biparietal diameter (BPD), head circumference (HC), abdominal circumference (AC) and femur diaphysis length (FL). These biometric measurements can be used to estimate fetal weight (EFW) using various different formulae1. It is important to differentiate between the concept of fetal size at a given timepoint and fetal growth, the latter being a dynamic process, the assessment of which requires at least two ultrasound scans separated in time. Maternal history and symptoms, amniotic fluid assessment and Doppler velocimetry can provide additional information that may be used to identify fetuses at risk of adverse pregnancy outcome. Accurate estimation of gestational age is a prerequisite for determining whether fetal size is appropriate­for­gestational age (AGA). Except for pregnancies arising from assisted reproductive technology, the date of conception cannot be determined precisely. Clinically, most pregnancies are dated by the last menstrual period, though this may sometimes be uncertain or unreliable. Therefore, dating pregnancies by early ultrasound examination at 8­14 weeks, based on measurement of the fetal crown­rump length (CRL), appears to be the most reliable method to establish gestational age. Once the CRL exceeds 84 mm, HC should be used for pregnancy dating2­4. HC, with or without FL, can be used for estimation of gestational age from the mid­trimester if a first­trimester scan is not available and the menstrual history is unreliable. When the expected delivery date has been established by an accurate early scan, subsequent scans should not be used to recalculate the gestational age1. Serial scans can be used to determine if interval growth has been normal. In these Guidelines, we assume that the gestational age is known and has been determined as described above, the pregnancy is singleton and the fetal anatomy is normal. Details of the grades of recommendation used in these Guidelines are given in Appendix 1. Reporting of levels of evidence is not applicable to these Guidelines.

Pautas de ISUOG para la práctica: evaluación ecográfica de la biometría y el crecimiento fetal INTRODUCCIÓN: El objetivo de estas Pautas es describir la evaluación adecuada de la biometría fetal y el diagnóstico de los trastornos del crecimiento fetal. Estos trastornos consisten principalmente en la restricción del crecimiento fetal (RCF), también conocida como restricción del crecimiento intrauterino (RCIU), que a menudo está asociada con un tamaño pequeño para la edad gestacional (PEG) o grande para la edad gestacional (GEG), que pueden dar lugar a la macrosomía fetal; ambos se han asociado con una variedad de resultados maternos y perinatales adversos. La detección y el tratamiento adecuado de las anomalías del crecimiento fetal son componentes esenciales de la atención prenatal, y la ecografía fetal desempeña un papel fundamental en la evaluación de estas afecciones. Los parámetros biométricos fetales medidos con mayor frecuencia son (todas las siglas procedentes del inglés) el diámetro biparietal (BPD), el perímetro cefálico (HC), el perímetro abdominal (AC) y la longitud de la diáfisis del fémur (FL). Estas mediciones biométricas se pueden utilizar para estimar el peso del feto (PEF) mediante fórmulas diferentes1 . Es importante diferenciar entre el concepto de tamaño fetal en un momento dado y el crecimiento fetal en sí, siendo este último un proceso dinámico cuya evaluación requiere al menos dos ecografías separadas en el tiempo. La historia y los síntomas de la madre, la evaluación del líquido amniótico y la velocimetría Doppler pueden proporcionar información adicional que se puede utilizar para identificar los fetos bajo riesgo de resultados adversos del embarazo. La estimación precisa de la edad gestacional es un prerrequisito para determinar si el tamaño del feto es apropiado para la edad gestacional (AEG). Excepto en el caso de los embarazos procedentes de tecnologías de reproducción asistida, la fecha de concepción no se puede determinar con precisión. Clínicamente, la fecha de la mayoría de los embarazos se establece en función del último período menstrual, aunque a veces esto puede ser incierto o poco fiable. Por lo tanto, el fechado de los embarazos mediante ecografía temprana a las 8-14 semanas, mediante la medición de la longitud céfalo-caudal (LCC) fetal, parece ser el método más fiable para establecer la edad gestacional. Una vez que la LCC excede los 84 mm, se debe usar el HC2-4 para establecer la fecha del embarazo. El HC, con o sin FL, se puede utilizar para estimar la edad gestacional a partir de la mitad del primer trimestre si no se dispone de una ecografía del primer trimestre y el historial menstrual no es fiable. Cuando se ha establecido la fecha prevista del parto mediante una exploración temprana precisa, no se deben utilizar exploraciones posteriores para recalcular la edad gestacional1 . Las exploraciones en serie se pueden utilizar para determinar si el intervalo del crecimiento ha sido normal. En estas Pautas se asume que la edad gestacional es conocida y ha sido determinada según lo anterior, que el embarazo es de feto único y que la anatomía fetal es normal. En el Apéndice 1 se detallan los grados de recomendación utilizados en estas Pautas. El informe sobre los niveles de evidencia no es aplicable a estas Pautas.

Quality assessment of uterine artery Doppler measurement in first-trimester combined screening for pre-eclampsia.

OBJECTIVE: To assess the quality of mean uterine artery (UtA) pulsatility index (PI) measurement in a first-trimester pre-eclampsia screening program. METHODS: Consecutive women with a singleton pregnancy attending first-trimester screening for fetal chromosomal abnormalities also had combined screening for pre-eclampsia based on the Fetal Medicine Foundation (FMF) algorithm, at a large practice in Sydney, Australia, from May 2014 to February 2017. Distributions of mean UtA-PI multiples of the median (MoM) on a logarithmic scale were plotted in relation to the normal median with 95% CI for each operator and for each month. Central tendency and dispersion and cumulative sum charts were produced. Mean UtA-PI MoM values between 0.95 and 1.05 were considered ideal and those between 0.90 and 1.10 were considered acceptable. The screen-positive rates for preterm pre-eclampsia in different groups of sonographers according to their mean log10 UtA-PI MoM were calculated and compared using the chi-square test. RESULTS: A total of 21 010 women attended for first-trimester ultrasound and had screening for pre-eclampsia. The overall median UtA-PI MoM was 1.042 (interquartile range (IQR), 0.85-1.26). Of 46 sonographers, 42 (91.3%) performed more than 50 examinations and, of those, 41 (97.6%) measured UtA-PI within the acceptable range. Sonographers measuring UtA-PI MoM on average below 0.95 and those measuring it above 1.05 had, respectively, lower and higher screen-positive rates when compared with those with measurements within the 0.95-1.05 UtA-PI MoM interval (7.2% and 13.2% vs 11.2%, respectively, P < 0.001). CONCLUSION: UtA Doppler is measured well among trained operators when following an established protocol. While slight variations are expected, systematic error in this measurement impacts on the screen-positive rate. Therefore, a quality control process should be in place and retraining of staff may be required. Copyright © 2018 ISUOG. Published by John Wiley & Sons Ltd.

Association between fetal fraction on cell-free DNA testing and first-trimester markers for pre-eclampsia.

OBJECTIVES: To evaluate the association between fetal fraction on cell-free DNA (cfDNA) testing and first-trimester markers for pre-eclampsia, and to investigate the possible association of low fetal fraction with increased risks for pre-eclampsia (PE) and fetal growth restriction (FGR). METHODS: This was a retrospective cohort study including all women with a singleton pregnancy who had risk calculation for PE and FGR between 11 + 0 and 13 + 6 weeks' gestation and who also had cfDNA as a primary or secondary screening test for chromosomal abnormalities at any gestational age at two fetal medicine clinics in Sydney and Melbourne, Australia, between March 2013 and May 2017. Logarithmically transformed fetal fraction results were adjusted for gestational age and maternal characteristics. Associations with mean arterial pressure (MAP), mean uterine artery pulsatility index (UtA-PI), pregnancy-associated plasma protein A (PAPP-A), placental growth factor (PlGF), and risks for PE < 34 weeks, PE < 37 weeks and FGR < 37 weeks were analyzed using correlation analysis and univariable and multivariable linear regressions. RESULTS: In total, 4317 singleton pregnancies that underwent cfDNA testing with fetal fraction reported were included. Significant prediction of fetal fraction was provided by gestational age, conception by in-vitro fertilization, maternal age, body mass index, chronic hypertension, diabetes mellitus, South Asian ethnicity and being parous without history of PE or FGR. Fetal fraction was associated inversely with MAP and UtA-PI and associated positively with PAPP-A and PlGF. The lower the fetal fraction, the higher were the risks for PE < 34 weeks, PE < 37 weeks and FGR < 37 weeks (P < 0.001 for all). CONCLUSIONS: There is a significant association between fetal fraction result and first-trimester markers for adverse pregnancy outcome. Low fetal fraction is associated with an increased risk for pregnancy complication, but its capacity to act an as independent first-trimester marker in an algorithm for screening for PE and FGR requires further research. Copyright © 2017 ISUOG. Published by John Wiley & Sons Ltd.