4.6 Article

Prediction of pre-eclampsia by uterine artery Doppler imaging: relationship to gestational age at delivery and small-for-gestational age

期刊

ULTRASOUND IN OBSTETRICS & GYNECOLOGY
卷 31, 期 3, 页码 310-313

出版社

WILEY
DOI: 10.1002/uog.5252

关键词

doppler; pre-eclampsia; screening; small-for-gestational age

向作者/读者索取更多资源

Objectives To determine the relationship between pre-eclampsia, small-for-gestational age (SGA) and gestational age at delivery, and the effect of this relationship on the prediction of pre-eclampsia by uterine artery Doppler imaging. Methods This was a multicenter prospective Doppler study of the uterine artery at 22-24 weeks of gestation in unselected women with singleton pregnancies. Results In the 3 0 63 9 pregnancies examined, the median uterine artery pulsatility index (PI) was 1.0 and the 95(th) centile was 1.58. In 614 (2%) cases the woman developed pre-eclampsia and in this group there was an inverse significant association between the gestational age at delivery and prevalence of SGA (r = -0.99, P < 0.0001), and between the gestational at delivery and mean uterine artery PI (r = -0.51, P < 0.0001) and prevalence of mean uterine artery PI above the 95(th) centile (r = -0.99, P < 0.0001). The mean uterine artery PI was above the 95(th) centile in 77.2% of women who developed pre-eclampsia requiring delivery before 34 weeks, in 35.9% of those delivering at 34-37 weeks and in 21.9% of those delivering after 3 7 weeks. The respective percentages were 82.3%, 46.9% and 28.8% for those with pre-eclampsia and SGA, and 43.8%, 21.2% and 8.4% for those with SGA but without pre-eclampsia. Conclusions Pre-eclampsia requiring early delivery is more likely to be associated with SGA than less severe pre-eclampsia in women who deliver at term. Doppler ultrasound assessment of the uterine arteries is more effective in identifying pre-eclampsia requiring preterm than term delivery. Copyright (C) 2008 ISUOG. Published by John Wiley & Sons, Ltd.

作者

我是这篇论文的作者
点击您的名字以认领此论文并将其添加到您的个人资料中。

评论

主要评分

4.6
评分不足

次要评分

新颖性
-
重要性
-
科学严谨性
-
评价这篇论文

推荐

暂无数据
暂无数据