4.5 Article

Placental volume and vascular flow assessed by 3D power Doppler and adverse pregnancy outcomes

Journal

PLACENTA
Volume 32, Issue 3, Pages 230-234

Publisher

W B SAUNDERS CO LTD
DOI: 10.1016/j.placenta.2011.01.010

Keywords

Placental volume; Vascular flow indices; 3D power Doppler; Preeclampsia; Small for gestational age

Funding

  1. NCRR NIH HHS [UL1 RR024992, UL1 RR024992-05] Funding Source: Medline
  2. NICHD NIH HHS [T32 HD055172-02, T32 HD055172] Funding Source: Medline

Ask authors/readers for more resources

Objective: To estimate the utility of first-trimester 3D-placental volume and vascular flow indices in the prediction of adverse pregnancy outcomes. Methods: A prospective cohort study including women with singleton pregnancies seen between 11 and 14 weeks as part of a screening program for aneuploidy. Placental volume and vascularization indices were obtained using 3D power Doppler imaging and the VOCAL technique. Placental volume (PV), Vascularization Index (VI). Flow Index (FI) and Vascularization Flow Index (VFI) were calculated. The adverse pregnancy outcomes investigated include preeclampsia (PE), gestational hypertension (GH) and small for gestational age (SGA). The predictive ability of each variable was evaluated using receiver-operating characteristic (ROC) curves. Results: Of 388 women included, PE was seen in 30 (7.7%), GH in 37 (9.0%) and SGA in 31(8.0%). Placental volume was not significantly different between the pregnancies with adverse outcomes and those without. The mean values of the VI and VFI were significantly lower in the pregnancies that developed PE but not in or SGA. The area under the ROC curve for the prediction of PE was 0.71, 0.69 and 0.70 for VI, FI and VFI, respectively. Conclusion: The study confirms lower 3D power Doppler vascular flow indices in pregnancies that develop PE. The discriminatory ability of using these indices alone for predicting PE appears modest. (C) 2011 Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved.

Authors

I am an author on this paper
Click your name to claim this paper and add it to your profile.

Reviews

Primary Rating

4.5
Not enough ratings

Secondary Ratings

Novelty
-
Significance
-
Scientific rigor
-
Rate this paper

Recommended

No Data Available
No Data Available