4.5 Review

Review: Systematic review of the utility of the fetal cerebroplacental ratio measured at term for the prediction of adverse perinatal outcome

期刊

PLACENTA
卷 54, 期 -, 页码 68-75

出版社

W B SAUNDERS CO LTD
DOI: 10.1016/j.placenta.2017.02.006

关键词

Cerebroplacental ratio; Dopplers; Perinatal outcomes

资金

  1. University of Queensland
  2. Mater Research Institute University of Queensland

向作者/读者索取更多资源

Aim: This systematic review evaluates the utility of the fetal cerebroplacental ratio (CPR) when assessed at term (from 37 0 weeks gestation) as a predictor of adverse obstetric and perinatal outcomes. Data sources and search strategy: An electronic search of Pubmed and Embase using variations of 'cerebroplacental ratio' and 'cerebroumbilical ratio' was conducted by two independent reviewers. Full text studies written in English that reported on low CPR and its correlation with relevant obstetric and perinatal outcomes were included. Results: Twenty one studies satisfied inclusion with 13 prospective and eight retrospective analyses. Fetal CPR was predictive of caesarean section for intrapartum fetal compromise, small for gestational age and fetal growth restriction and neonatal intensive care unit admission. Low CPR was also significantly associated with abnormal fetal heart rate pattern, meconium stained liquor, low Apgar score, acidosis at birth and composite adverse perinatal outcome scores. The CPR when taken at term had comparable if not better predictive value than that when taken at preterm. Most studies included small for gestational age fetuses and postdate pregnancies. Subtle variation existed in the threshold for low CPR. Conclusion: The CPR at term has a strong association with adverse obstetric and perinatal outcomes. This review suggests the predictive utility of CPR at term is promising however there is insufficient evidence to demonstrate its value as a stand-alone test. Inclusion of CPR as a component of clinical care may help better identify fetuses at risk of adverse outcome, and this should be tested with randomised control trials. (C) 2017 Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved.

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

4.5
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