Skip to main content
SpringerLink
Log in

Antepartum Testing

  • Chapter
  • First Online:
Diabetes in Pregnancy

  • 1926 Accesses

Abstract

This chapter discusses the role of antepartum fetal surveillance in the management of diabetic pregnancy. The historical challenges in improving neonatal outcomes are discussed. The problem of stillbirth in diabetic pregnancy, causes, and timing is reviewed as well as possible prevention strategies. The development of antepartum fetal surveillance testing as a means of determining appropriate timing of delivery to prevent stillbirth and reducing iatrogenic prematurity is reviewed. The use of various methods of fetal antepartum testing are discussed in regard to the use of general and diabetic pregnancies: fetal nonstress testing, biophysical profile, modified biophysical profile, umbilical artery Doppler, and biochemical screening. Current recommendations for applying antepartum testing schemes in clinical management of diabetic pregnancies are reviewed.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this chapter

Log in via an institution

Institutional subscriptions

References

  1. Williams JW. Obstetrics. New York: D. Appleton; 1903.

    Google Scholar 

  2. Skipper E. Diabetes mellitus and pregnancy. A clinical and analytical study (with special observations upon thirty-three cases). Q J Med. 1933;2:353–80.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  3. White P. Pregnancy complicating diabetes. Am J Med. 1949;7:609–16.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  4. White P. Pregnancy and diabetes, the annual review. Diabetes. 1958;7(6):494–5.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  5. Dudley DJ. Diabetic-associated stillbirth: incidence, pathophysiology, and prevention. Clin Perinatol. 2007;34(4):611–26.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  6. Mondestrin MA. Birth weight and fetal death in the United States: the effect of maternal diabetes during pregnancy. Am J Obstet Gynecol. 2002;187:922.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  7. Little SE, Zera CA. A multi-state analysis of early-term delivery trends and the association with term stillbirth. Obstet Gynecol. 2015;126(6):1138–45.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  8. Starikov R, Dudley D. Stillbirth in the pregnancy complicated by diabetes. Curr Diab Rep. 2015;15(3):11.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  9. Reddy UM, Laughon SK. Prepregnancy risk factors for antepartum stillbirth in the United States. Obstet Gynecol. 2010;116(5):1119–26.

    Article  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  10. Gardosi J, Madurasinghe V. Maternal and fetal risk factors for stillbirth: population based study. BMJ. 2013;346(1):f108–82.

    Article  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  11. Bradley RJ, Brudenell JM. Fetal acidosis and hyperlacticaemia diagnosed by cordocentesis in pregnancies. Diabet Med. 1991;8(5):464–8.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  12. Pedersen J. The pregnant diabetic and her newborn: problems and management. Chicago: Williams & Wilkins; 1967.

    Google Scholar 

  13. Philipps AF, Porte PJ. Effects of chronic fetal hyperglycemia upon oxygen consumption in the ovine uterus and conceptus. J Clin Invest. 1984;74:279–86.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  14. Datta SA. Acid-base status in diabetic mothers and their infants following general or spinal anesthesia for cesarean section. Anesthesiology. 1977;3:272–6.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  15. Buescher U, Hertwig K. Erythropoietin in amniotic fluid as a marker of chronic fetal hypoxia. Int J Gynaecol Obstet. 1998;60:257–63.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  16. Teramo K, Kari MA. High amniotic fluid erythropoietin levels are associated with an increased frequency of fetal and neonatal morbidity in type 1 diabetic pregnancies. Diabetologia. 2004;47:1695–703.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  17. Widness JA, Teramo KA. Direct relationship of antepartum glucose control and fetal erythropoietin in human type 1 (insulin-dependent) diabetic pregnancy. Diabetologia. 1990;33:378–83.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  18. Lauenborg J, Mathiesen E. Audit on stillbirths in women with pregestational type 1 diabetes. Diabetes Care. 2003;26:1385–9.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  19. Halse KG, Lindegaard ML. Increased plasma pro-B-type natriuretic peptide in infants of women with type 1 diabetes. Clin Chem. 2005;5:2296–302.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  20. Teramo KA. Obstetric problems in diabetic pregnancy—the role of fetal hypoxia. Best Pract Res Clin Endocrinol Metab. 2010;24(4):663–71.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  21. Huang DY, Usher RH. Determinants of unexplained antepartum fetal deaths. Obstet Gynecol. 2000;95(2):215–21.

    CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  22. Mashini IS, Fadel HE. Indications for and timing of delivery in diabetic pregnancies. Am J Obstet Gynecol. 1985;153(7):759–66.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  23. Teramo K, Hiilesmaa VK. Amniotic fluid and cord plasma erythropoietin levels in pregnancies complicated by preeclampsia, pregnancy-induced hypertension and chronic hypertension. J Perinat Med. 2004;32(3):240–7.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  24. Miehle K, Stepan H. Leptin, adiponectin and other adipokines in gestational diabetes mellitus and pre-eclampsia. Clin Endocrinol. 2012;76(1):2–11.

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  25. Vintzileos AM, Gaffney SE. The relationship between fetal biophysical profile and cord pH in patients undergoing cesarean section before the onset of labor. Obstet Gynecol. 1987;70(2):196–201.

    CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  26. Moore TR, Piacquadio K. A prospective evaluation of fetal movement screening to reduce the incidence of antepartum fetal death. Am J Obstet Gynecol. 1989;160(5):1075–80.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  27. Frøen JF, Heazell AE. Fetal movement assessment. Semin Perinatol. 2008;32(4):243–6.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  28. Lagrew DC Jr. The contraction stress test. Clin Obstet Gynecol. 1995;38(1):11–25.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  29. Freeman RK, Anderson G. A prospective multi-institutional study of antepartum fetal heart rate monitoring: II. Contraction stress test versus nonstress test for primary surveillance. Am J Obstet Gynecol. 1982;143(7):778–81.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  30. Devoe LD. Antenatal fetal assessment: contraction stress test, nonstress test, vibroacoustic stimulation, amniotic fluid volume, biophysical profile, and modified biophysical profile—an overview. Semin Perinatol. 2008;32(4):247–52.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  31. American College of Obstetrics and Gynecology. Practice bulletin no. 145: antepartum fetal surveillance. Obstet Gynecol. 2014;124(1):182–90.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  32. Clark SL, Sabey P. Nonstress testing with acoustic stimulation and amniotic fluid volume assessment: 5973 tests without unexpected fetal death. Am J Obstet Gynecol. 1989;160(3):694–7.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  33. Smith CV, Phelan JP. Fetal acoustic stimulation testing: II. A randomized clinical comparison with the nonstress test. Am J Obstet Gynecol. 1986;155(1):131–4.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  34. Cousins LM, Poeltler DM. Nonstress testing at ≤ 32.0 weeks’ gestation: a randomized trial comparing different assessment criteria. Am J Obstet Gynecol. 2012;207(4):311.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  35. Girz BA, Divon MY, Merkatz IR. Sudden fetal death in women with well-controlled, intensively monitored gestational diabetes. J Perinatol. 1992;12(3):229–33.

    CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  36. Barrett JM, Salyer SL. The nonstress test: an evaluation of 1000 patients. Am J Obstet Gynecol. 1981;141(2):153–7.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  37. Pazos R, Vuolo K. Association of spontaneous fetal heart rate decelerations during antepartum nonstress testing and intrauterine growth retardation. Am J Obstet Gynecol. 1982;144(5):574–7.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  38. Manning FA, Morrison I. Fetal biophysical profile scoring: selective use of the nonstress test. Am J Obstet Gynecol. 1987;156(3):709–12.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  39. Miller DA, Rabello YA. The modified biophysical profile: antepartum testing in the 1990s. Am J Obstet Gynecol. 1996;174(3):812–7.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  40. Nageotte MP, Towers CV. Perinatal outcome with the modified biophysical profile. Am J Obstet Gynecol. 1994;170(5):1672–6.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  41. Eller DP, Stramm SL. The effect of maternal intravenous glucose administration on fetal activity. Am J Obstet Gynecol. 1992;167(4):1071–4.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  42. Vintzileos AM, Campbell WA. The use and misuse of the fetal biophysical profile. Am J Obstet Gynecol. 1987;156(3):527–33.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  43. Biggio JR, Wenstrom KD. Hydramnios prediction of adverse perinatal outcome. Obstet Gynecol. 1999;94(5):773–7.

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  44. Pilliod RA, Page JM. The risk of fetal death in nonanomalous pregnancies affected by polyhydramnios. Am J Obstet Gynecol. 2015;213(3):410–e1.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  45. Salvesen DR, Freeman J. Prediction of fetal acidaemia in pregnancies complicated by maternal diabetes mellitus by biophysical profile scoring and fetal heart rate monitoring. Br J Obstet Gynaecol. 1993;100(3):227–33.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  46. Johnson JM, Lange IR. Biophysical profile scoring in the management of the diabetic pregnancy. Obstet Gynecol. 1988;72(6):841–6.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  47. Kjos SL, Leung A. Antepartum surveillance in diabetic pregnancies: predictors of fetal distress in labor. Am J Obstet Gynecol. 1995;173(5):1532–9.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  48. Kingdom JC, Burrell SJ. Pathology and clinical implications of abnormal umbilical artery Doppler waveforms. Ultrasound Obstet Gynecol. 1997;9(4):271–86.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  49. Alfirevic Z, Stampalija T. Fetal and umbilical Doppler ultrasound in high-risk pregnancies. Cochrane Libr. 2010;1(1):CD007529.

    Google Scholar 

  50. Berkley E, Chauhan SP. Doppler assessment of the fetus with intrauterine growth restriction. Am J Obstet Gynecol. 2012;206(4):300–8.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  51. Bracero LA, Figueroa R, Byrne DW, Han HJ. Comparison of umbilical Doppler velocimetry, nonstress testing, and biophysical profile in pregnancies complicated by diabetes. J Ultrasound Med. 1996;15(4):301–8.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  52. Bracero LA, Haberman S. Maternal glycemic control and umbilical artery Doppler velocimetry. J Matern Fetal Neonatal Med. 2002;12(5):342–8.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  53. Wong SF, Chan FY. Use of umbilical artery Doppler velocimetry in the monitoring of pregnancy in women with pre-existing diabetes. Aust N Z J Obstet Gynaecol. 2003;43(4):302–6.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  54. Reece EA, Homko CJ. Doppler velocimetry and the assessment of fetal well-being in normal and diabetic pregnancies. Ultrasound Obstet Gynecol. 1994;4(6):508–14.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  55. Gutaj P, Wender-Ozegowska E. Diagnosis and management of IUGR in pregnancy complicated by type 1 diabetes mellitus. Curr Diab Rep. 2016;16(5):1–9.

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  56. Landon MB, Vickers S. Fetal surveillance in pregnancy complicated by diabetes mellitus: is it necessary? J Matern Fetal Neonatal Med. 2002;12(6):413–6.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  57. American College of Obstetricians and Gynecologists. ACOG practice bulletin no. 134: fetal growth restriction. Obstet Gynecol. 2013;121(5):1122.

    Article  Google Scholar 

Download references

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. Division of Maternal Fetal Medicine, Department of Obstetrics and Gynecology, University of New Mexico Health Sciences Center, Albuquerque, NM, 87131, USA

    Valerie Rappaport MD

Authors
  1. Valerie Rappaport MD
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Valerie Rappaport MD .

Editor information

Editors and Affiliations

  1. Texas Tech Health Sciences Center, Paul L. Foster School of Medicine, El Paso, Texas, USA

    Lisa E. Moore

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

Copyright information

© 2018 Springer International Publishing AG

About this chapter

Cite this chapter

Rappaport, V. (2018). Antepartum Testing. In: Moore, L. (eds) Diabetes in Pregnancy. Springer, Cham. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-319-65518-5_17

Download citation

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-319-65518-5_17

  • Published:

  • Publisher Name: Springer, Cham

  • Print ISBN: 978-3-319-65517-8

  • Online ISBN: 978-3-319-65518-5

  • eBook Packages: MedicineMedicine (R0)

Publish with us

Policies and ethics

Search

Navigation