Main Article Content
high-risk pregnancies, Doppler studies, pregnant women
Background: Mostly in well-developed countries, the major cause of death in neonatal and mothers is eclampsia and preeclampsia. Every year, approximately 50 thousand maternal deaths are recorded, which are caused by eclampsia. When we talk about the healthcare sector of Pakistan, it is reported that 34 percent of maternal deaths in Pakistan are caused by eclampsia.
Objective: To assess the prevalence of Doppler velocimetry usage among women with high-risk pregnancies and to analyse the impact of Doppler velocimetry on outcomes in the management of high-risk pregnancies.
Study design: An analytical cross-sectional study
Place and Duration: This study was conducted in Almana General Hospital Jubail Saudi Arabia from May 2022 to May 2023
Methodology: Women who had active singleton pregnancies were included in this research. Moreover, the patients had a gestational age of more than 20 weeks, frequent antenatal visits, and normal blood pressure measured. All the participants were between 17 and 34 years old. All of the participants were divided into two groups. Group A included people with an ultrasound Doppler. Group B included people without an ultrasound Doppler. SPSS version 26 was used to analyze the data. The chi-square test was used for the comparison of the results. A significant p-value was defined as less than 0.05.
Results: There were a total of 140 pregnant women included in this research. The average age calculated was 30.5 years. The average gestational age calculated was 35.2 weeks. The average body mass index was 27.5 kg/m2. There were 56 patients in group A and 84 patients in group B.
Conclusion: Positive results in both obstetric and neonatal care were observed through the monitoring of high-risk pregnancies using Doppler studies. However, the use of other well-established diagnostic investigations at each medical facility affects the relevance of Doppler in late pregnancy research.
2. NEWNHAM JP, O'DEA MR, REID KP, DIEPEVEEN DA. Doppler flow velocity waveform analysis in high risk pregnancies: a randomized controlled trial. BJOG: An International Journal of Obstetrics & Gynaecology. 1991 Oct;98(10):956-63.
3. Tyrrell SN, Lilford RJ, Macdonald HN, Nelson EJ, Porter J, Gupta JK. Randomized comparison of routine vs highly selective use of Doppler ultrasound and biophysical scoring to investigate high risk pregnancies. BJOG: An International Journal of Obstetrics & Gynaecology. 1990 Oct;97(10):909-16.
4. Heinonen S, Ryynänen M, Kirkinen P, Saarikoski S. Perinatal diagnostic evaluation of velamentous umbilical cord insertion: clinical, Doppler, and ultrasonic findings. Obstetrics & Gynecology. 1996 Jan 1;87(1):112-7.
5. Alfirevic Z, Neilson JP. Doppler ultrasonography in high-risk pregnancies: systematic review with meta-analysis. American journal of obstetrics and gynecology. 1995 May 1;172(5):1379-87.
6. Williams KP, Farquharson DF, Bebbington M, Dansereau J, Galerneau F, Wilson RD, Shaw D, Kent N. Screening for fetal well-being in a high-risk pregnant population comparing the nonstress test with umbilical artery Doppler velocimetry: a randomized controlled clinical trial. American journal of obstetrics and gynecology. 2003 May 1;188(5):1366-71.
7. Coleman MA, McCowan LM, North RA. Mid‐trimester uterine artery Doppler screening as a predictor of adverse pregnancy outcome in high‐risk women. Ultrasound in Obstetrics and Gynecology. 2000 Jan;15(1):7-12.
8. Haws RA, Yakoob MY, Soomro T, Menezes EV, Darmstadt GL, Bhutta ZA. Reducing stillbirths: screening and monitoring during pregnancy and labour. BMC pregnancy and childbirth. 2009 May;9(1):1-48.
9. Toal M, Chan C, Fallah S, Alkazaleh F, Chaddha V, Windrim RC, Kingdom JC. Usefulness of a placental profile in high-risk pregnancies. American journal of obstetrics and gynecology. 2007 Apr 1;196(4):363-e1.
10. Johnstone FD, Prescott R, Hoskins P, Greer IA, McGlew T, Compton M. The effect of introduction of umbilical Doppler recordings to obstetric practice. BJOG: An International Journal of Obstetrics & Gynaecology. 1993 Aug;100(8):733-41.
11. Burns PN. Principles of Doppler and color flow. Radiol Med. 1993 May;85(5 Suppl 1):3-16.
12. Messawa M, Ma’ajeni E, Daghistani MH, Ayaz A, Farooq MU. The role of doppler ultrasound in high risk pregnancy: A comparative study. Niger Med J. 2012 Jul-Sep; 53(3):116–120.
13. Hartung J, Kalache KD, Heyna C, et al. Outcome of 60 neonates who had ARED flow prenatally compared with a matched control group of appropriate-for-gestational age preterm neonates. Ultrasound Obstet Gynecol. 2005; 25:566-72
14. Sebire NJ, Goldin RD, Regan L. Histomorphological evidence for chronic vasoconstriction of placental stem vessels in pregnancies with intrauterine growth restriction and abnormal umbilical artery Doppler velocimetry indices. J Pathol. 2001; 195:19A.
15. Papageorghiou AT, Yu CK, Bindra R, Pandis G, Nicolaides KH, et al. Multicenter screening for pre-eclampsia and fetal growth restriction by transvaginal uterine artery Doppler at 23 weeks of gestation. Ultrasound Obstet Gynecol. 2001 Nov;18(5):441–9.
16. Groom KM, North RA, Stone PR, Chan EH, et al. Patterns of Change in Uterine Artery Doppler Studies Between 20 and 24 Weeks of Gestation and Pregnancy Outcomes. Obstet Gynecol. 2009 Feb;113(2 Pt 1):332–8.
17. Hecher K, Bilardo CM, Stigter RH, et al. Monitoring of fetuses with intrauterine growth restriction: a longitudinal study. Ultrasound Obstet Gynecol. 2001;18:564-70.
18. Soothill PW, Ajayi RA, Campbell S, et al. Relationship between fetal acidemia at cordocentesis and subsequent neurodevelopment. Ultrasound Obstet Gynecol.1992; 2:80-3.
19. Zelop CM, Richardson DK, Heffner LJ. Outcomes of severely abnormal umbilical artery doppler velocimetry in structurally normal singleton fetuses. Obstet Gynecol. 1996; 87:434-8.
20. Harman CR, Baschat AA, Gembruch U. Venous Doppler in IUGR. Which vessel? Which parameter? Am J Obstet Gynecol. 2001;185:53.