Correlation of Doppler Velocimetry of Uterine and Umbilical Arteries with Placental Pathology in Pregnancy Associated with Intrauterine Growth Restriction
- 7 Downloads
To correlate histomorphology of the placenta with Doppler studies of uterine and umbilical arteries. A comparative observational study conducted on 75 pregnant women divided into 2 groups: Group 1 included 25 women with appropriate for gestational age fetuses. Group 2 included 50 women with FGR. Uterine and umbilical artery Doppler, study of placental pathology and immunohistochemistry of placental villous tissues were evaluated. There was a significant difference between the two study groups regarding both abnormal uterine (0 vs. 58%) and umbilical artery (0 vs. 58%) Doppler (p < 0.001). Syncytial knots > 30% (44 vs. 60%), fibrinoid necrosis > 5% (8 vs. 46.7%), placental infarction > 5% (0 vs. 15%), perivillous fibrinoid deposition > 5% (1.8 vs. 16.7%) (p < 0.001) but not calcifications (56 vs. 60%, p = 0.121) were significantly higher in FGR placentas. A statistically significant (p < 0.001) increase in the expression of VEGF in FGR placentas when compared with normal placentas. Abnormal uterine artery but not umbilical artery Doppler was significantly associated with abnormal placental pathology. Women with both abnormal uterine and umbilical artery Doppler velocimetries were delivered earlier and their babies had lower mean birth and placental weight (p < 0.001). Incidence of abnormal placental pathology was significantly higher in this specific group of FGR pregnancies (p < 0.001). There is high association between abnormal uterine and umbilical artery Doppler and placental pathology in FGR associated pregnancies.
Trial Registration NCT03081754.
KeywordsUterine artery Doppler Umbilical artery Doppler FGR Placental pathology
Compliance with Ethical Standards
Conflict of interest
No conflict of interest.
- 4.Bukowski R, Uchida T, Smith GC, Malone FD, Ball RH, Nyberg DA, Comstock CH, Hankins GD, Berkowitz RL, Gross SJ, Dugoff L, Craigo SD, Timor IE, Carr SR, Wolfe HM, D’Alton ME, First and Second Trimester Evaluation of Risk (FASTER) Research Consortium. Individualized norms of optimal fetal growth. Obstet Gynecol. 2008;111(5):1065–76. https://doi.org/10.1097/AOG.0b013e3181704e48.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
- 11.Biswas S. Placental changes in idiopathic intra uterine growth restriction. OA Anat. 2013;1(2):11.Google Scholar
- 18.Chitty LS, Altman D. Appendix: charts of fetal measurements. In: Rodeck CH, Whittle MJ, editors. Fetal medicine, basic science and clinical practice. London: Churchill Livingstone; 1999. p. 1095–140.Google Scholar
- 24.Kingdom J, Walker M, Drewlo S, Keating S. Intrauterine growth restriction: placental basis and implications for clinical practice. In: Kilby MD, Johnson A, Oepkes D, editors. Fetal therapy. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press; 2012.Google Scholar
- 25.Gómez O, Figueras F, Martínez JM, del Río M, Palacio M, Eixarch E, Puerto B, Coll O, Cararach V, Vanrell JA. Sequential changes in uterine artery blood flow pattern between the first and second trimesters of gestation in relation to pregnancy outcome. Ultrasound Obstet Gynecol. 2006;28(6):802–8.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
- 31.Afodun AM, Quadri KK, Masud MA, Ogunsola OA, Muhammad RO, Ajiboye RA, Caxton-Martins EA. Histological and histochemical studies of normal and growth retarded human placental tissue. Eur J Anat. 2014;18(3):153–8.Google Scholar
- 35.Bernstein I, Gabbe SG. Intrauterine growth restriction. In: Gabbe SG, Niebyl JR, Simpson JL, Annas GJ, editors. Obstetrics: normal and problem pregnancies. 3rd ed. New York: Churchill Livingstone; 1996. p. 863–86.Google Scholar