Doppler Diagnosis

  • Andrea Dall’Asta
  • Tullio Ghi
  • Tiziana Frusca


Fetal growth restriction (FGR) is a disorder affecting the fetal development and an acknowledged risk factor for poor neonatal condition at birth and adverse outcome in the infanthood and adulthood. FGR is characterized by pathological smallness caused by an underlying functional problem, most commonly related to placental insufficiency leading to fetal hypoxia. Under these circumstances, fetal early adaptive mechanisms involve the diversion of the cardiac output preferentially in favor of the brain and the heart, while abnormal arterial and venous flow manifest in the case of further worsening of fetal hypoxia. Doppler ultrasound has become an essential tool for the diagnosis and the surveillance in FGR. In this chapter, we discuss the evidence-based role of the umbilical artery, middle cerebral artery, ductus venosus, and fetal cardiac Doppler in the diagnosis and monitoring of non-anomalous singleton fetuses with FGR of suspected placental origin.


Umbilical artery Doppler Middle cerebral artery Ductus venosus Brain sparing Heart sparing Customized growth charts Cardiac Doppler Estimated fetal weight 


  1. 1.
    Mcintire DD, Bloom SL, Casey BM, Leveno KJ. Birth weight in relation to morbidity and mortality among newborn infants. N Engl J Med. 1999;340:1234–8.PubMedCrossRefPubMedCentralGoogle Scholar
  2. 2.
    Garite TJ, Combs CA, Maurel K, Das A, Huls K, Porreco R, et al. A multicenter prospective study of neonatal outcomes at less than 32 weeks associated with indications for maternal admission and delivery. Am J Obstet Gynecol. 2017;217:72.e1–9.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  3. 3.
    Society for Maternal-Fetal Medicine Publications Committee, Berkley E, Chauhan SP, Abuhamad A. Doppler assessment of the fetus with intrauterine growth restriction. Am J Obstet Gynecol. 2012;206:300–8.Google Scholar
  4. 4.
    Yanney M, Marlow N. Paediatric consequences of fetal growth restriction. Semin Fetal Neonatal Med. 2004;9:411–8.PubMedCrossRefPubMedCentralGoogle Scholar
  5. 5.
    Marlow N, Wolke D, Bracewell MA, Samara M, The Epicure Study Group. Neurologic and developmental disability at six years of age after extremely preterm birth. N Engl J Med. 2005;352:9–19.PubMedCrossRefPubMedCentralGoogle Scholar
  6. 6.
    Low J, Handley M, Burke S, Peters RD, Pater EA, Killen HL, et al. Association of intrauterine growth retardation and learning deficits at age 9 to it years. Am J Obstet Gynecol. 1992;162:1499–505.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  7. 7.
    Figueras F, Gardosi J. Intrauterine growth restriction: new concepts in antenatal surveillance, diagnosis, and management. Am J Obstet Gynecol. 2011;204:288–300.PubMedPubMedCentralCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  8. 8.
    Kennelly MM, Farah N, Turner MJ, Stuart B. Aortic isthmus Doppler velocimetry: role in assessment of preterm fetal growth restriction. Prenat Diagn. 2010;30:395–401.PubMedPubMedCentralGoogle Scholar
  9. 9.
    Lees C, Marlow N, Arabin B, Bilardo CM, Brezinka C, Derks JB, et al. Perinatal morbidity and mortality in early-onset fetal growth restriction: cohort outcomes of the trial of randomized umbilical and fetal flow in Europe (TRUFFLE). Ultrasound Obstet Gynecol. 2013;42:400–8.PubMedPubMedCentralCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  10. 10.
    Gardosi J, Chang A, Kalyan B, Sahota D, Symonds EM. Customised antenatal growth charts. Lancet. 1992;339:283–7.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  11. 11.
    Gardosi J, Giddings S, Buller S, Southam M, Williams M. Preventing stillbirths through improved antenatal recognition of pregnancies at risk due to fetal growth restriction. Public Health. 2014;128:698–702.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  12. 12.
    Van den Wijngaard JA, Groenenberg IA, Wladimiroff JW, Hop WC. Cerebral Doppler ultrasound of the human fetus. Br J Obstet Gynaecol. 1989;96:845–9.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  13. 13.
    Rizzo G, Arduini D, Romanini C. Doppler echocardiographic assessment of fetal cardiac function. Ultrasound Obstet Gynecol. 1992;2:434–45.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  14. 14.
    Stampalija T, Casati D, Monasta L, Sassi R, Rivolta MW, Muggiasca ML, et al. Brain sparing effect in growth-restricted fetuses is associated with decreased cardiac acceleration and deceleration capacities: a case-control study. BJOG. 2016;123:1947–54.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  15. 15.
    Hecher K, Campbell S, Doyle P, Harrington K, Nicolaides K. Assessment of fetal compromise by Doppler ultrasound investigation of the fetal circulation, arterial, intracardiac, and venous blood flow velocity studies. Circulation. 1995;91:129–38.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  16. 16.
    Gordijn SJ, Beune IM, Thilaganathan B, Papageorghiou A, Baschat AA, Baker PN, et al. Consensus definition of fetal growth restriction: a Delphi procedure. Ultrasound Obstet Gynecol. 2016;48:333–9.CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentralGoogle Scholar
  17. 17.
    Khalil A, Morales-Rosello J, Khan N, Nath M, Agarwal P, Bhide A, et al. Is cerebroplacental ratio a marker of impaired fetal growth velocity and adverse pregnancy outcome? Am J Obstet Gynecol. 2017;216:606.e1–606.e10.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  18. 18.
    Khalil A, Thilaganathan B. Role of uteroplacental and fetal Doppler in identifying fetal growth restriction at term. Best Pract Res Clin Obstet Gynaecol. 2017;38:38–47.PubMedCrossRefPubMedCentralGoogle Scholar
  19. 19.
    Morales-Roselló J, Khalil A, Morlando M, Papageorghiou A, Bhide A, Thilaganathan B. Changes in fetal Doppler indices as a marker of failure to reach growth potential at term. Ultrasound Obstet Gynecol. 2014;43:303–10.PubMedCrossRefPubMedCentralGoogle Scholar
  20. 20.
    Dall’Asta A, Brunelli V, Prefumo F, Frusca T, Lees CC. Early onset fetal growth restriction. Matern Health Neonatol Perinatol. 2017;3:2.PubMedPubMedCentralCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  21. 21.
    DallʼAsta A, Lees C. Early second-trimester fetal growth restriction and adverse perinatal outcomes. Obstet Gynecol. 2018;131:739–40.PubMedCrossRefPubMedCentralGoogle Scholar
  22. 22.
    Unterscheider J, Daly S, Geary MP, Kennelly MM, McAuliffe FM, O’Donoghue K, et al. Predictable progressive Doppler deterioration in IUGR: does it really exist? Am J Obstet Gynecol. 2013;209:539.e1–7.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  23. 23.
    Turan OM, Turan S, Gungor S, Berg C, Moyano D, Gembruch U, et al. Progression of Doppler abnormalities in intrauterine growth restriction. Ultrasound Obstet Gynecol. 2008;32:160–7.PubMedPubMedCentralCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  24. 24.
    Baschat AA, Güclü S, Kush ML, Gembruch U, Weiner CP, Harman CR. Venous Doppler in the prediction of acid-base status of growth-restricted fetuses with elevated placental blood flow resistance. Am J Obstet Gynecol. 2004;191:277–84.PubMedCrossRefPubMedCentralGoogle Scholar
  25. 25.
    Ferrazzi E, Bellotti M, Galan H, Pennati G, Bozzo M, Rigano S, et al. Doppler investigation in intrauterine growth restriction – from qualitative indices to flow measurements: a review of the experience of a collaborative group. Ann N Y Acad Sci. 2001;943:316–25.PubMedCrossRefPubMedCentralGoogle Scholar
  26. 26.
    Kiserud T, Kessler J, Ebbing C, Rasmussen S. Ductus venosus shunting in growth-restricted foetuses and the effect of umbilical circulatory compromise. Ultrasound Obstet Gynecol. 2006;28:143–9.PubMedCrossRefPubMedCentralGoogle Scholar
  27. 27.
    Hecher K, Bilardo CM, Stigter RH, Ville Y, Hackelöer BJ, Kok HJ, et al. Monitoring of fetuses with intrauterine growth restriction: a longitudinal study. Ultrasound Obstet Gynecol. 2001;18:564–70.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  28. 28.
    Hecher K, Snijders R, Campbell S, Nicolaides K. Fetal venous, intracardiac, and arterial blood flow measurements in intrauterine growth retardation; relationship with fetal blood gases. Am J Obstet Gynecol. 1995;173:10–5.PubMedCrossRefPubMedCentralGoogle Scholar
  29. 29.
    Rizzo G, Capponi A, Arduini D, Romanini C. The value of fetal arterial, cardiac and venous flows in predicting pH and blood gases measured in umbilical blood at cordocentesis in growth retarded fetuses. Br J Obstet Gyanecol. 1995;102:963–9.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  30. 30.
    Kingdom JC, Burrell SJ, Kaufmann P. Pathology and clinical implications of abnormal umbilical artery Doppler waveforms. Ultrasound Obstet Gynecol. 1997;9:271–86.PubMedCrossRefPubMedCentralGoogle Scholar
  31. 31.
    Khare M, Paul S, Konje J. Variation in Doppler indices along the length of the cord from the intraabdominal to the placental insertion. Acta Obstet Gynecol Scand. 2006;85:922–8.PubMedCrossRefPubMedCentralGoogle Scholar
  32. 32.
    Acharya G, Wilsgaard T, Berntsen G, Maltau J, Kiserud T. Reference ranges for serial measurements of blood velocity and pulsatility index at the intra-abdominal portion, and fetal and placental ends of the umbilical artery. Ultrasound Obstet Gynecol. 2005;26:162–9.PubMedCrossRefPubMedCentralGoogle Scholar
  33. 33.
    Acharya G, Wilsgaard T, Berntsen G, Maltau J, Kiserud T. Reference ranges for serial measurements of umbilical artery Doppler indices in the second half of pregnancy. Am J Obstet Gynecol. 2005;192:937–44.PubMedCrossRefPubMedCentralGoogle Scholar
  34. 34.
    Bhide A, Acharya G, Bilardo CM, Brezinka C, Cafici D, Hernandez-Andrade E, et al. ISUOG practice guidelines: use of Doppler ultrasonography in obstetrics. Ultrasound Obstet Gynecol. 2013;41:233–9.PubMedCrossRefPubMedCentralGoogle Scholar
  35. 35.
    Morrow RJ, Adamson SL, Bull SB, Ritchie JW. Effect of placental embolization on the umbilical arterial velocity waveform in fetal sheep. Am J Obstet Gynecol. 1989;161:1055–60.PubMedCrossRefPubMedCentralGoogle Scholar
  36. 36.
    Thompson RS, Trudinger BJ. Doppler waveform pulsatility index and resistance, pressure and flow in the umbilical placental circulation: an investigation using a mathematical model. Ultrasound Med Biol. 1990;16:449–58.PubMedCrossRefPubMedCentralGoogle Scholar
  37. 37.
    Soothill PW, Bobrow CS, Holmes R. Small for gestational age is not a diagnosis. Ultrasound Obstet Gynecol. 1999;13:225–8.PubMedCrossRefPubMedCentralGoogle Scholar
  38. 38.
    Bobrow CS, Soothill PW. Fetal growth velocity: a cautionary tale. Lancet. 1999;353:1460.PubMedCrossRefPubMedCentralGoogle Scholar
  39. 39.
    McCowan LM, Harding JE, Stewart AW. Umbilical artery Doppler studies in small for gestational age babies reflect disease severity. BJOG. 2000;107:916–25.PubMedCrossRefPubMedCentralGoogle Scholar
  40. 40.
    Figueras F, Eixarch E, Gratacos E, Gardosi J. Predictiveness of antenatal umbilical artery Doppler for adverse pregnancy outcome in small-for-gestational-age babies according to customised birthweight centiles: population based study. BJOG. 2008;115:590–4.PubMedCrossRefPubMedCentralGoogle Scholar
  41. 41.
    Doctor BA, O’Riordan MA, Kirchner HL, Shah D, Hack M. Perinatal correlates and neonatal outcomes of small for gestational age infants born at term gestation. Am J Obstet Gynecol. 2001;185:652–9.PubMedCrossRefPubMedCentralGoogle Scholar
  42. 42.
    Severi FM, Bocchi C, Visentin A, Falco P, Cobellis L, Florio P, et al. Uterine and fetal cerebral Doppler predict the outcome of third-trimester small-for-gestational age fetuses with normal umbilical artery Doppler. Ultrasound Obstet Gynecol. 2002;19:225–8.PubMedCrossRefPubMedCentralGoogle Scholar
  43. 43.
    Pardi G, Cetin I, Marconi AM, Lanfranchi A, Bozzetti P, Ferrazzi E, et al. Diagnostic value of blood sampling in fetuses with growth retardation. N Engl J Med. 1993;328:692–6.PubMedCrossRefPubMedCentralGoogle Scholar
  44. 44.
    Figueras F, Gratacos E. Update on the diagnosis and classification of fetal growth restriction and proposal of a stage-based management protocol. Fetal Diagn Ther. 2014;36:86–98.PubMedPubMedCentralCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  45. 45.
    Alfirevic Z, Stampalija T, Gyte GM. Fetal and umbilical Doppler ultrasound in high-risk pregnancies. Cochrane Database Syst Rev. 2013;11:CD007529.Google Scholar
  46. 46.
    RCOG Green Top Guidline No. 31. The investigation and management of the small-for-gestational age fetus. January 2014.Google Scholar
  47. 47.
    Arduini D, Rizzo G, Romanini C. The development of abnormal heart rate patterns after absent end-diastolic velocity in umbilical artery: analysis of risk factors. Am J Obstet Gynecol. 1993;168:43–50.PubMedCrossRefPubMedCentralGoogle Scholar
  48. 48.
    Brar H, Platt L. Reverse end diastolic flow velocity on umbilical artery velocimetry in high pregnancies: an ominous finding with adverse pregnancy outcome. Am J Obstet Gynecol. 1988;159:559–61.PubMedCrossRefPubMedCentralGoogle Scholar
  49. 49.
    Valcamonico A, Danti L, Frusca T, Soregaroli M, Zucca S, Abrami F, et al. Absent end diastolic velocity in umbilical artery: risk of neonatal morbidity and brain damage. Am J Obstet Gynecol. 1994;170:796–801.PubMedCrossRefPubMedCentralGoogle Scholar
  50. 50.
    Ferrazzi E, Bozzo M, Rigano S, Bellotti M, Morabito A, Pardi G, et al. Temporal sequence of abnormal Doppler changes in the peripheral and central circulatory systems of the severely growth-restricted fetus. Ultrasound Obstet Gynecol. 2002;19:140–6.PubMedCrossRefPubMedCentralGoogle Scholar
  51. 51.
    Mari G, Abuhamad AZ, Cosmi E, Segata M, Altaye M, Akiyama M. Middle cerebral artery peak systolic velocity: technique and variability. J Ultrasound Med. 2005;24:425–30.PubMedCrossRefPubMedCentralGoogle Scholar
  52. 52.
    Mari G, Deter RL. Middle cerebral artery flow velocity waveforms in normal and small for gestational age fetuses. Am J Obstet Gynecol. 1992;166:1262–70.PubMedCrossRefPubMedCentralGoogle Scholar
  53. 53.
    Hernandez-Andrade E, Stampalija T, Figueras F. Cerebral blood flow studies in the diagnosis and management of intrauterine growth restriction. Curr Opin Obstet Gynecol. 2013;25:138–44.PubMedCrossRefPubMedCentralGoogle Scholar
  54. 54.
    Meher S, Hernandez-Andrade E, Basheer SN, Lees C. Impact of cerebral redistribution on neurodevelopmental outcome in small-for-gestational-age or growth-restricted babies: a systematic review. Ultrasound Obstet Gynecol. 2015;46:398–404.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  55. 55.
    Eixarch E, Meler E, Iraola A, Illa M, Crispi F, Hernandez-Andrade E, et al. Neurodevelopmental outcome in 2-year-old infants who were small-for-gestational age term fetuses with cerebral blood flow redistribution. Ultrasound Obstet Gynecol. 2008;32:894–9.PubMedPubMedCentralCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  56. 56.
    Stampalija T, Arabin B, Wolf H, Bilardo CM, Lees C, TRUFFLE investigators. Is middle cerebral artery Doppler related to neonatal and 2-year infant outcome in early fetal growth restriction. Am J Obstet Gynecol. 2017;216:521.e1–13.Google Scholar
  57. 57.
    Parra-Saavedra M, Simeone S, Triunfo S, Crovetto F, Botet F, Nadal A, et al. Correlation between histological signs of placental underperfusion and perinatal morbidity in late-onset small-for-gestational-age fetuses. Ultrasound Obstet Gynecol. 2015;45:149–55.PubMedCrossRefPubMedCentralGoogle Scholar
  58. 58.
    Figueras F, Savchev S, Triunfo S, Crovetto F, Gratacos E. An integrated model with classification criteria to predict small-for-gestational-age fetuses at risk of adverse perinatal outcome. Ultrasound Obstet Gynecol. 2015;45:279–85.PubMedCrossRefPubMedCentralGoogle Scholar
  59. 59.
    Triunfo S, Crispi F, Gratacos E, Figueras F. Prediction of delivery of small-for-gestational-age neonates and adverse perinatal outcome by fetoplacental Doppler at 37 weeks’ gestation. Ultrasound Obstet Gynecol. 2017;49:364–71.PubMedCrossRefPubMedCentralGoogle Scholar
  60. 60.
    Cruz-Martínez R, Figueras F, Hernandez-Andrade E, Oros D, Gratacos E. Fetal brain Doppler to predict cesarean delivery for nonreassuring fetal status in term small-for-gestational-age fetuses. Obstet Gynecol. 2011;117:618–26.PubMedPubMedCentralCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  61. 61.
    Gramellini D, Folli MC, Raboni S, Vadora E, Merialdi A. Cerebral-umbilical Doppler ratio as a predictor of adverse perinatal outcome. Obstet Gynecol. 1992;79:416–20.PubMedCrossRefPubMedCentralGoogle Scholar
  62. 62.
    Baschat AA, Gembruch U. The cerebroplacental Doppler ratio revisited. Ultrasound Obstet Gynecol. 2003;21:124–7.PubMedCrossRefPubMedCentralGoogle Scholar
  63. 63.
    Prior T, Mullins E, Bennett P, Kumar S. Prediction of intrapartum fetal compromise using the cerebro-umbilical ratio: a prospective observational study. Am J Obstet Gynecol. 2013;208:124.e1–6.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  64. 64.
    Kiserud T. Physiology of the fetal circulation. Semin Fetal Neonatal Med. 2005;10:493–503.PubMedCrossRefPubMedCentralGoogle Scholar
  65. 65.
    Lees CC, Marlow N, van Wassenaer-Leemhuis A, Arabin B, Bilardo CM, Brezinka C, et al. 2 year neurodevelopmental and intermediate perinatal outcomes in infants with very preterm fetal growth restriction (TRUFFLE): a randomised trial. Lancet. 2015;385:2162–72.PubMedPubMedCentralCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  66. 66.
    Bilardo CM, Hecher K, Visser GH, Papageorghiou AT, Marlow N, Thilaganathan B, et al. Severe fetal growth restriction at 26–32 weeks: key messages from the TRUFFLE study. Ultrasound Obstet Gynecol. 2017;50:285–90.PubMedCrossRefPubMedCentralGoogle Scholar
  67. 67.
    Frusca T, Todros T, Lees C, Bilardo CM, TRUFFLE Investigators. Outcome in early-onset fetal growth restriction is best combining computerized fetal heart rate analysis with ductus venosus Doppler: insights from the Trial of Umbilical and Fetal Flow in Europe. Am J Obstet Gynecol. 2018;218:S783–9.PubMedCrossRefPubMedCentralGoogle Scholar
  68. 68.
    Ganzevoort W, Mensing Van Charante N, Thilaganathan B, Prefumo F, Arabin B, Bilardo CM, et al. How to monitor pregnancies complicated by fetal growth restriction and delivery before 32 weeks: post-hoc analysis of TRUFFLE study. Ultrasound Obstet Gynecol. 2017;49:769–77.PubMedCrossRefPubMedCentralGoogle Scholar
  69. 69.
    Visser GH, Bilardo CM, Derks JB, Ferrazzi E, Fratelli N, Frusca T, et al. Fetal monitoring indications for delivery and 2-year outcome in 310 infants with fetal growth restriction delivered before 32 weeks’ gestation in the TRUFFLE study. Ultrasound Obstet Gynecol. 2017;50:347–52.PubMedPubMedCentralCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  70. 70.
    Baschat AA, Turan OM, Turan S. Ductus venosus blood-flow patterns: more than meets the eye? Ultrasound Obstet Gynecol. 2012;39:598–9.PubMedCrossRefPubMedCentralGoogle Scholar
  71. 71.
    Baschat AA, Hecher K. Fetal growth restriction due to placental disease. Semin Perinatol. 2004;28:67–80.PubMedCrossRefPubMedCentralGoogle Scholar
  72. 72.
    Baschat AA. Fetal responses to placental insufficiency: an update. BJOG. 2004;111:1031–41.PubMedCrossRefPubMedCentralGoogle Scholar
  73. 73.
    Turan OM, Turan S, Sanapo L, Rosenbloom JI, Baschat AA. Semiquantitative classification of ductus venosus blood flow patterns. Ultrasound Obstet Gynecol. 2014;43:508–14.PubMedCrossRefPubMedCentralGoogle Scholar
  74. 74.
    Cosmi E, Ambrosini G, D’Antona D, Saccardi C, Mari G. Doppler, cardiotocography, and biophysical profile changes in growth-restricted fetuses. Obstet Gynecol. 2005;106:1240–5.PubMedPubMedCentralCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  75. 75.
    Baschat AA, Gembruch U, Harmann CR. The sequence of changes in Doppler and biophysical parameters as severe fetal growth restriction worsens. Ultrasound Obstet Gynecol. 2001;18:571–7.PubMedCrossRefPubMedCentralGoogle Scholar
  76. 76.
    Schwarze A, Gembruch U, Krapp M, Katalinic A, Germer U, Axt-Fliedner R. Qualitative venous Doppler flow waveform analysis in preterm intrauterine growth-restricted fetuses with ARED flow in the umbilical artery – correlation with short-term outcome. Ultrasound Obstet Gynecol. 2005;25:573–9.PubMedCrossRefPubMedCentralGoogle Scholar
  77. 77.
    Chaoui R. The fetal ‘heart-sparing effect’ detected by the assessment of coronary blood flow: a further ominous sign of fetal compromise. Ultrasound Obstet Gynecol. 1996;7:5–9.PubMedCrossRefPubMedCentralGoogle Scholar
  78. 78.
    Baschat AA, Gembruch U, Reiss I, Gortner L, Diedrich K. Demonstration of fetal coronary blood flow by Doppler ultrasound in relation to arterial and venous flow velocity waveforms and perinatal outcome – the ‘heart-sparing effect’. Ultrasound Obstet Gynecol. 1997;9:162–72.PubMedCrossRefPubMedCentralGoogle Scholar
  79. 79.
    Crispi F, Figueras F, Cruz-Lemini M, Bartrons J, Bijnens B, Gratacos E. Cardiovascular programming in children born small for gestational age and relationship with prenatal signs of severity. Am J Obstet Gynecol. 2012;207:121.e1–9.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  80. 80.
    Hernandez-Andrade E, Benavides-Serralde JA, Cruz-Martinez R, Welsh A, Mancilla-Ramirez J. Evaluation of conventional Doppler fetal cardiac function parameters: E/A ratios, outflow tracts, and myocardial performance index. Fetal Diagn Ther. 2012;32:22–9.PubMedCrossRefPubMedCentralGoogle Scholar
  81. 81.
    Cruz-Martinez R, Figueras F, Benavides-Serralde A, Crispi F, Hernandez-Andrade E, Gratacos E. Sequence of changes in myocardial performance index in relation to aortic isthmus and ductus venosus Doppler in fetuses with early-onset intrauterine growth restriction. Ultrasound Obstet Gynecol. 2011;38:179–84.PubMedCrossRefPubMedCentralGoogle Scholar
  82. 82.
    Del Río M, Martínez JM, Figueras F, Bennasar M, Olivella A, Palacio M, et al. Doppler assessment of the aortic isthmus and perinatal outcome in preterm fetuses with severe intrauterine growth restriction. Ultrasound Obstet Gynecol. 2008;31:41–7.PubMedCrossRefPubMedCentralGoogle Scholar
  83. 83.
    Del Río M, Martinez JM, Figueras F, Bennasar M, Palacio M, Gomez O, et al. Doppler assessment of fetal aortic isthmus blood flow in two different sonographic planes during the second half of gestation. Ultrasound Obstet Gynecol. 2005;26:170–4.PubMedCrossRefPubMedCentralGoogle Scholar
  84. 84.
    Rizzo G, Capponi A, Vendola M, Pietrolucci ME, Arduini D. Relationship between aortic isthmus and ductus venosus velocity waveforms in severe growth restricted fetuses. Prenat Diagn. 2008;28:1042–7.PubMedCrossRefPubMedCentralGoogle Scholar
  85. 85.
    Acharya G. Technical aspects of aortic isthmus Doppler velocimetry in human fetuses. Ultrasound Obstet Gynecol. 2009;33:628–33.PubMedCrossRefPubMedCentralGoogle Scholar
  86. 86.
    Ruskamp J, Fouron JC, Gosselin J, Raboisson MJ, Infante-Rivard C, Proulx F. Reference values for an index of fetal aortic isthmus blood flow during the second half of pregnancy. Ultrasound Obstet Gynecol. 2003;21:441–4.PubMedCrossRefPubMedCentralGoogle Scholar
  87. 87.
    Bonnin P, Fouron JC, Teyssier G, Sonesson SE, Skoll A. Quantitative assessment of circulatory changes in the fetal aortic isthmus during progressive increase of resistance to umbilical blood flow. Circulation. 1993;88:216–22.PubMedCrossRefPubMedCentralGoogle Scholar
  88. 88.
    Fouron JC. The unrecognized physiological and clinical significance of the fetal aortic isthmus. Ultrasound Obstet Gynecol. 2003;22:441–7.PubMedCrossRefPubMedCentralGoogle Scholar
  89. 89.
    Makikallio K, Jouppila P, Rasanen J. Retrograde net blood flow in the aortic isthmus in relation to human fetal arterial and venous circulations. Ultrasound Obstet Gynecol. 2002;19:147–52.PubMedCrossRefPubMedCentralGoogle Scholar
  90. 90.
    Makikallio K, Jouppila P, Rasanen J. Retrograde aortic isthmus net blood flow and human fetal cardiac function in placental insufficiency. Ultrasound Obstet Gynecol. 2003;22:351–7.PubMedCrossRefPubMedCentralGoogle Scholar
  91. 91.
    Jouppila P, Kirkinen P. Increased vascular resistance in the descending aorta of the human fetus in hypoxia. Br J Obstet Gynaecol. 1984;91:853–6.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  92. 92.
    Arabin B, Siebert M, Jimenez E, Saling E. Obstetrical characteristics of a loss of end-diastolic velocities in the fetal aorta and/or umbilical artery using Doppler ultrasound. Gynecol Obstet Investig. 1988;25:173–80.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  93. 93.
    Fouron JC, Gosseli J, Raboisson MJ, Lamoureux J, Tison CA, Fouron C, et al. The relationship between an aortic isthmus blood flow velocity and the postnatal neurodevelopmental status of fetuses with placental circulatory insufficiency. Am J Obstet Gynecol. 2005;192:497–503.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  94. 94.
    Van der Mooren K, Barendregt LG, Wladimiroff JW. Fetal atrioventricular and outflow tract flow velocity waveforms during normal second half of pregnancy. Am J Obstet Gyencol. 1991;165:668–74.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  95. 95.
    Tulzer G, Khowsathit P, Gudmundsson S, Wood DC, Tian ZY, Schmitt K, et al. Diastolic function of the fetal heart during second and third trimester: a prospective longitudinal Doppler-echocardiographic study. Eur J Pediatr. 1994;153:151–4.PubMedCrossRefPubMedCentralGoogle Scholar
  96. 96.
    Figueras F, Puerto B, Martinez JM, Cararach V, Vanrell JA. Cardiac function monitoring of fetuses with growth restriction. Eur J Obstet Gynecol Reprod Biol. 2003;110:159–63.PubMedCrossRefPubMedCentralGoogle Scholar
  97. 97.
    Mäkikallio K, Räsänen J, Mäkikallio T, Vuolteenaho O, Huhta JC. Human fetal cardiovascular profile score and neonatal outcome in intrauterine growth restriction. Ultrasound Obstet Gynecol. 2008;31:48–54.PubMedCrossRefPubMedCentralGoogle Scholar
  98. 98.
    Tei C, Ling LH, Hodge DO, Bailey KR, Oh JK, Rodeheffer RJ, et al. New index of combined systolic and diastolic myocardial performance: a simple and reproducible measure of cardiac function – a study in normal and dilated cardiomyopathy. J Cardiol. 1995;26:357–66.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  99. 99.
    Van Mieghem T, Klaritsch P, Doné E, Gucciardo L, Lewi P, Verhaeghe J, et al. Assessment of fetal cardiac function before and after therapy for twin-to-twin transfusion syndrome. Am J Obstet Gynecol. 2009;200:400.e1–7.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  100. 100.
    Hassan WA, Brockelsby J, Alberry M, Fanelli T, Wladimiroff J, Lees CC. Cardiac function in early onset small for gestational age and growth restricted fetuses. Eur J Obstet Gynecol Reprod Biol. 2013;171:262–5.PubMedCrossRefPubMedCentralGoogle Scholar
  101. 101.
    Benavides-Serralde A, Scheier M, Cruz-Martinez R, Crispi F, Figueras F, Gratacos E, et al. Changes in central and peripheral circulation in intrauterine growth-restricted fetuses at different stages of umbilical artery flow deterioration: new fetal cardiac and brain parameters. Gynecol Obstet Investig. 2011;71:274–80.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  102. 102.
    Pérez-Cruz M, Cruz-Lemini M, Fernández MT, Parra JA, Bartrons J, Gómez-Roig MD, et al. Fetal cardiac function in late-onset intrauterine growth restriction vs small-for-gestational age, as defined by estimated fetal weight, cerebroplacental ratio and uterine artery Doppler. Ultrasound Obstet Gynecol. 2015;46:465–71.PubMedCrossRefPubMedCentralGoogle Scholar
  103. 103.
    Cruz-Martinez R, Figueras F, Hernandez-Andrade E, Oros D, Gratacos E. Changes in myocardial performance index and aortic isthmus and ductus venosus Doppler in term, small-for-gestational age fetuses with normal umbilical artery pulsatility index. Ultrasound Obstet Gynecol. 2011;38:400–5.PubMedCrossRefPubMedCentralGoogle Scholar
  104. 104.
    Hernandez-Andrade E, Crispi F, Benavides-Serralde JA, Plasencia W, Diesel HF, Eixarch E, et al. Contribution of the myocardial performance index and aortic isthmus blood flow index to predicting mortality in preterm growth-restricted fetuses. Ultrasound Obstet Gynecol. 2009;34:430–6.PubMedCrossRefPubMedCentralGoogle Scholar
  105. 105.
    Jurkovic D, Jauniaux E, Kurjak A, Hustin J, Campbell S, Nicolaides KH. Transvaginal color Doppler assessment of the uteroplacental circulation in early pregnancy. Obstet Gynecol. 1991;77:365–9.PubMedPubMedCentralGoogle Scholar
  106. 106.
    Jauniaux E, Jurkovic D, Campbell S, Hustin J. Doppler ultrasonographic features of the developing placental circulation; correlation with anatomic findings. Am J Obstet Gynecol. 1992;166:585–7.PubMedCrossRefPubMedCentralGoogle Scholar
  107. 107.
    Cnossen JS, Morris RK, ter Riet G, Mol BW, van der Post JA, Coomarasamy A, et al. Use of uterine artery Doppler ultrasonography to predict pre-eclampsia and intrauterine growth restriction: a systematic review and bivariable meta-analysis. CMAJ. 2008;178:701–11.PubMedPubMedCentralCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  108. 108.
    Sciscione AC, Hayes EJ; Society for Maternal-Fetal Medicine. Uterine artery Doppler flow studies in obstetric practice. Am J Obstet Gynecol. 2009;201:121–6.Google Scholar
  109. 109.
    Gòmez O, Figueras F, Fernàndez S, Bennasar M, Martìnez JM, Puerto B, et al. Reference ranges for uterine artery mean pulsatility index at 11–41 weeks of gestation. Ultrasound Obstet Gynecol. 2008;32:128–32.PubMedCrossRefPubMedCentralGoogle Scholar
  110. 110.
    Papageorghiou AT, Yu CK, Bindra R, Pandis G, Nicolaides KH; Fetal Medicine Foundation Second Trimester Screening Group. Multicenter screening for pre-eclampsia and fetal growth restriction by transvaginal uterine artery Doppler at 23 weeks of gestation. Ultrasound Obstet Gynecol. 2001;18:441–9.PubMedCrossRefPubMedCentralGoogle Scholar
  111. 111.
    Ferreira AE, Mauad Filho F, Abreu PS, Mauad FM, Araujo Júnior E, Martins WP. Reproducibility of first- and second-trimester uterine artery pulsatility index measured by transvaginal and transabdominal ultrasound. Ultrasound Obstet Gynecol. 2015;46:546–52.PubMedCrossRefPubMedCentralGoogle Scholar
  112. 112.
    Li N, Ghosh G, Gudmundsson S. Uterine artery Doppler in high-risk pregnancies at 23–24 gestational weeks is of value in predicting adverse outcome of pregnancy and selecting cases for more intense surveillance. Acta Obstet Gynecol Scand. 2014;93:1276–81.PubMedCrossRefPubMedCentralGoogle Scholar
  113. 113.
    Khalil AA, Morales-Rosello J, Elsaddig M, Khan N, Papageorghiou A, Bhide A, et al. The association between fetal Doppler and admission to neonatal unit at term. Am J Obstet Gynecol. 2015;213:57.e1–7.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  114. 114.
    Papageorghiou AT, Yu CK, Cicero S, Bower S, Nicolaides KH. Second-trimester uterine artery Doppler screening in unselected populations: a review. J Matern Fetal Neonatal Med. 2002;12:78–88.PubMedCrossRefPubMedCentralGoogle Scholar
  115. 115.
    Valiño N, Giunta G, Gallo DM, Akolekar R, Nicolaides KH. Uterine artery pulsatility index at 30–34 weeks’ gestation in the prediction of adverse perinatal outcome. Ultrasound Obstet Gynecol. 2016;47:308–15.PubMedCrossRefPubMedCentralGoogle Scholar
  116. 116.
    Cruz-Martinez R, Savchev S, Cruz-Lemini M, Mendez A, Gratacos E, Figueras F. Clinical utility of third-trimester uterine artery Doppler in the prediction of brain hemodynamic deterioration and adverse perinatal outcome in small-for-gestational-age fetuses. Ultrasound Obstet Gynecol. 2015;45:273–8.PubMedCrossRefPubMedCentralGoogle Scholar
  117. 117.
    Flo K, Wilsgaard T, Vårtun A, Acharya G. A longitudinal study of the relationship between maternal cardiac output measured by impedance cardiography and uterine artery blood flow in the second half of pregnancy. BJOG Int J Obstet Gynaecol. 2010;117:837–44.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  118. 118.
    Ghi T, degli Esposti D, Montaguti E, Rosticci M, Tancredi S, Youssef A, et al. Maternal cardiac evaluation during uncomplicated twin pregnancy with emphasis on the diastolic function. Am J Obstet Gynecol. 2015;213:376.e1–8.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  119. 119.
    Valensise H, Tiralongo GM, Pisani I, Farsetti D, Lo Presti D, Gagliardi G, et al. Maternal hemodynamics early in labor: a possible link with obstetric risk? Ultrasound Obstet Gynecol. 2018;51:509–13.PubMedCrossRefPubMedCentralGoogle Scholar
  120. 120.
    Tiralongo GM, Pisani I, Vasapollo B, Khalil A, Thilaganathan B, Valensise H. Effect of a nitric oxide donor on maternal hemodynamics in fetal growth restriction. Ultrasound Obstet Gynecol. 2018;51:514–8.PubMedCrossRefPubMedCentralGoogle Scholar
  121. 121.
    Gagliardi G, Tiralongo GM, LoPresti D, Pisani I, Farsetti D, Vasapollo B, et al. Screening for pre-eclampsia in the first trimester: role of maternal hemodynamics and bioimpedance in non-obese patients. Ultrasound Obstet Gynecol. 2017;50:584–8.PubMedCrossRefPubMedCentralGoogle Scholar
  122. 122.
    Pijnenborg R, Vercruysse L, Hanssens M. The uterine spiral arteries in human pregnancy: facts and controversies. Placenta. 2006;27:939–58.PubMedCrossRefPubMedCentralGoogle Scholar
  123. 123.
    Steegers EA, von Dadelszen P, Duvekot JJ, Pijnenborg R. Pre-eclampsia. Lancet. 2010;376:631–44.PubMedPubMedCentralCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  124. 124.
    Mifsud W, Sebire NJ. Placental pathology in early-onset and late-onset fetal growth restriction. Fetal Diagn Ther. 2014;36:117–28.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  125. 125.
    Xiong X, Demianczuk NN, Saunders LD, Wang FL, Fraser WD. Impact of preeclampsia and gestational hypertension on birth weight by gestational age. Am J Epidemiol. 2002;155:203–9.PubMedCrossRefPubMedCentralGoogle Scholar
  126. 126.
    Valensise H, Vasapollo B, Gagliardi G, Novelli GP. Early and late preeclampsia: two different maternal hemodynamic states in the latent phase of the disease. Hypertension. 2008;52:873–80.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  127. 127.
    Verlohren S, Melchiorre K, Khalil A, Thilaganathan B. Uterine artery Doppler, birth weight and timing of onset of pre-eclampsia: providing insights into the dual etiology of late-onset pre-eclampsia. Ultrasound Obstet Gynecol. 2014;44:293–8.PubMedCrossRefPubMedCentralGoogle Scholar
  128. 128.
    Thilaganathan B. Pre-eclampsia is primarily a placental disorder: AGAINST: pre-eclampsia: the heart matters. BJOG. 2017;124:1763.PubMedCrossRefPubMedCentralGoogle Scholar
  129. 129.
    Stott D, Papastefanou I, Paraschiv D, Clark K, Kametas NA. Longitudinal maternal hemodynamics in pregnancies affected by fetal growth restriction. Ultrasound Obstet Gynecol. 2017;49:761–8.PubMedCrossRefPubMedCentralGoogle Scholar
  130. 130.
    Ferrazzi E, Stampalija T, Monasta L, Di Martino D, Vonck S, Gyselaers W. Maternal hemodynamics: a method to classify hypertensive disorders of pregnancy. Am J Obstet Gynecol. 2018;218:124.e1–124.e11.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  131. 131.
    Salomon LJ, Alfirevic Z, Bilardo CM, Chalouhi GE, Ghi T, Kagan KO, et al. ISUOG practice guidelines: performance of first-trimester fetal ultrasound scan. Ultrasound Obstet Gynecol. 2013;41:102–13.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  132. 132.
    Gardosi J, Clausson B, Francis A. The value of customised centiles in assessing perinatal mortality risk associated with parity and maternal size. BJOG. 2009;116:1356–63.PubMedCrossRefPubMedCentralGoogle Scholar
  133. 133.
    Odibo AO, Cahill AG, Odibo L, Roehl K, Macones GA. Prediction of intrauterine fetal death in small-for-gestational-age fetuses: impact of including ultrasound biometry in customized models. Ultrasound Obstet Gynecol. 2012;39:288–92.PubMedCrossRefPubMedCentralGoogle Scholar
  134. 134.
    Smith NA, Bukowski R, Thomas AM, Cantonwine D, Zera C, Robinson JN. Identification of pathologically small fetuses using customized, ultrasound and population-based growth norms. Ultrasound Obstet Gynecol. 2014;44:595–9.PubMedCrossRefPubMedCentralGoogle Scholar
  135. 135.
    Ghi T, Cariello L, Rizzo L, Ferrazzi E, Periti E, Prefumo F, et al. Customized fetal growth charts for parents’ characteristics, race and parity by Quantile regression analysis: a cross-sectional multicenter Italian study. J Ultrasound Med. 2016;35:83–92.PubMedPubMedCentralCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  136. 136.
    Kiserud T, Piaggio G, Carroli G, Widmer M, Carvalho J, Neerup Jensen L, et al. The World Health Organization fetal growth charts: a multinational longitudinal study of ultrasound biometric measurements and estimated fetal weight. PLoS Med. 2017;14:e1002220.PubMedPubMedCentralCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  137. 137.
    Papageorghiou AT, Ohuma EO, Altman DG, Todros T, Cheikh Ismail L, Lambert A, et al. International standards for fetal growth based on serial ultrasound measurements: the Fetal Growth Longitudinal Study of the INTERGROWTH-21st Project. Lancet. 2014;384:869–79.PubMedPubMedCentralCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  138. 138.
    Miranda J, Rodriguez-Lopez M, Triunfo S, Sairanen M, Kouru H, Parra-Saavedra M, et al. Prediction of fetal growth restriction using estimated fetal weight vs a combined screening model in the third trimester. Ultrasound Obstet Gynecol. 2017;50:603–11.PubMedCrossRefPubMedCentralGoogle Scholar
  139. 139.
    Unterscheider J, Daly S, Geary MP, Kennelly MM, McAuliffe FM, O’Donoghue K, et al. Optimizing the definition of intrauterine growth restriction: the multicenter prospective PORTO Study. Am J Obstet Gynecol. 2013;208:290.e1–6.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  140. 140.
    Triunfo S, Crovetto F, Scazzocchio E, Parra-Saavedra M, Gratacos E, Figueras F. Contingent versus routine third-trimester screening for late fetal growth restriction. Ultrasound Obstet Gynecol. 2016;47:81–8.PubMedCrossRefPubMedCentralGoogle Scholar
  141. 141.
    Sovio U, White IR, Dacey A, Pasupathy D, Smith GCS. Screening for fetal growth restriction with universal third trimester ultrasonography in nulliparous women in the Pregnancy Outcome Prediction (POP) study: a prospective cohort study. Lancet. 2015;386:2089–97.PubMedPubMedCentralCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  142. 142.
    Bakalis S, Silva M, Akolekar R, Poon LC, Nicolaides KH. Prediction of small-for-gestational-age neonates: screening by fetal biometry at 30–34 weeks. Ultrasound Obstet Gynecol. 2015;45:551–8.PubMedCrossRefPubMedCentralGoogle Scholar
  143. 143.
    Roma E, Arnau A, Berdala R, Bergos C, Montesinos J, Figueras F. Ultrasound screening for fetal growth restriction at 36 vs 32 weeks’ gestation: a randomized trial (ROUTE). Ultrasound Obstet Gynecol. 2015;46:391–7.PubMedPubMedCentralCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  144. 144.
    Dall’Asta A, Ghi T, Rizzo G, Cancemi A, Aloisio F, Arduini D, et al. Early labor cerebroplacental ratio assessment in uncomplicated term pregnancies and prediction of adverse perinatal outcomes: a prospective, multicentre study. Ultrasound Obstet Gynecol. 2018;
  145. 145.
    GRIT Study Group. A randomised trial of timed delivery for the compromised preterm fetus: short term outcomes and Bayesian interpretation. BJOG. 2003;110:27–32.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  146. 146.
    Wolf H, Arabin B, Lees CC, Oepkes D, Prefumo F, Thilaganathan B, et al. Longitudinal study of computerized cardiotocography in early fetal growth restriction. Ultrasound Obstet Gynecol. 2017;50:71–8.PubMedCrossRefPubMedCentralGoogle Scholar
  147. 147.
    Ghosh GS, Gudmundsson S. Uterine and umbilical artery Doppler are comparable in predicting perinatal outcome of growth-restricted fetuses. BJOG. 2009;116:424–30.PubMedCrossRefPubMedCentralGoogle Scholar
  148. 148.
    DeVore GR. The importance of the cerebroplacental ratio in the evaluation of fetal Well-being in SGA and AGA fetuses. Am J Obstet Gynecol. 2015;213:5–15.PubMedCrossRefPubMedCentralGoogle Scholar
  149. 149.
    Ghi T, Frusca T, Lees CC. Cerebroplacental ratio in fetal surveillance: an alert bell or a crash sound? Am J Obstet Gynecol. 2016;214:297–8.PubMedCrossRefPubMedCentralGoogle Scholar
  150. 150.
    Vergani P, Roncaglia N, Andreotti C, Arreghini A, Teruzzi M, Pezzullo JC, et al. Prognostic value of uterine artery Doppler velocimetry in growth-restricted fetuses delivered near term. Am J Obstet Gynecol. 2002;187:932–6.PubMedCrossRefPubMedCentralGoogle Scholar
  151. 151.
    Barker DJ, Osmond C, Golding J, Kuh D, Wadsworth ME. Growth in utero, blood pressure in childhood and adult life, and mortality from cardiovascular disease. BMJ. 1989;298:564–7.PubMedPubMedCentralCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  152. 152.
    Barker DJ. Fetal origins of coronary heart disease. BMJ. 1995;311:171–4.PubMedPubMedCentralCrossRefGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer Nature Switzerland AG 2019

Authors and Affiliations

  • Andrea Dall’Asta
    • 1
  • Tullio Ghi
    • 1
  • Tiziana Frusca
    • 1
  1. 1.Department of Medicine and Surgery, Obstetrics and Gynecology UnitUniversity of ParmaParmaItaly

Personalised recommendations