4.2 Article

The cerebroplacental ratio and prediction of fetal growth restriction in twin pregnancies

Journal

JOURNAL OF MATERNAL-FETAL & NEONATAL MEDICINE
Volume 35, Issue 26, Pages 10608-10612

Publisher

TAYLOR & FRANCIS LTD
DOI: 10.1080/14767058.2022.2141563

Keywords

Cerebroplacental ratio; fetal growth restriction; uteroplacental Doppler; twins; fetal blood flow

Ask authors/readers for more resources

This study found that in twin pregnancies, low or high discordant CPR at 20-24 weeks is not associated with an increased risk of fetal growth restriction (FGR) in the third trimester.
Objectives The cerebroplacental ratio (CPR) represents the relationship between blood flow in the placenta and blood flow in the fetal brain. A low CPR in the third trimester has been associated with poor perinatal outcomes in both singleton and twin gestations. This study aimed to evaluate whether low CPR defined or high CPR discordance at 20-24 weeks in twin pregnancies is associated with an increased risk of fetal growth restriction (FGR) in the third trimester. Methods A total of 247 twin pregnancies were included in this retrospective cohort study. Monoamniotic monochorionic twins were excluded. An abnormal CPR was defined as one or both CPR 20%. FGR was evaluated using the last growth measurement performed between 28 and 36 weeks. Results Of the candidates for study, 177 twin pregnancies had normal CPRs and 70 twin pregnancies had abnormal CPRs. Maternal demographics were similar between groups. There was no difference in the risk of selective FGR, FGR of both twins, or growth discordance >20% in the third trimester between twin pregnancies with normal vs. abnormal CPRs at 20-24 weeks. The adjusted odds ratio for any growth disturbance was 1.00 (95% CI 0.56-1.79). Conclusions This study suggests that FGR in twins may be the consequence of numerous maternal, fetal, and placental factors, and not fully explained by redistribution of blood flow or adaptive hypoxia in the mid-trimester.

Authors

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

Reviews

Primary Rating

4.2
Not enough ratings

Secondary Ratings

Novelty
-
Significance
-
Scientific rigor
-
Rate this paper

Recommended

No Data Available
No Data Available