Advertisement

Schwangerschaftsinduzierte Hypertonie und Präeklampsie

  • H. Steiner
Chapter

Auszug

Die schwangerschaftsinduzierte Hypertonie (SIH) und Präeklampsie stellen für die Schwangerschaft ein relevantes Risiko dar. Mittels Dopplersonographie ist eine Risikoeinschätzung (Screening) für das Auftreten — oder besser noch — den Ausschluss von schweren Verlaufsformen von SIH und Präeklampsien durch die Untersuchung der Uterinarterien im 2. Trimenon in Risikokollektiven möglich. Im Fall der klinisch manifesten Hypertonie, SIH und Präeklampsie (PE) ermöglicht eine dopplersonographische Untersuchung des uteroplazentaren und umbilikalen bzw. fetalen Gefäßgebiets einen Einblick in die aktuelle Hämodynamik und erlaubt damit ein optimiertes Management. Aus diesen Gründen ist sowohl bei anamnestischem Risiko (Zustand nach Präeklampsie und Eklampsie) als auch bei bestehender SIH und Präeklampsie eine Indikation zur dopplersonographischen Untersuchung gegeben und in den Mutterschaftsrichtlinien festgelegt [Standardkommission der Arbeitsgemeinschaft Dopplersonographie und maternofetale Medizin (AGDMFM) 1996].

Preview

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

Literatur

  1. Albaiges G, Missfelder-Lobos H, Lees C, Parra M, Nicolaides KH (2000) One-stage screening for pregnancy complications by color Doppler assessment of the uterine arteries at 23 weeks’gestation. Obstet Gynecol. 96(4)559–564.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  2. Aquilina J, Barnett A, Thompson O, Harrington K (2000) Comprehensive analysis of uterine artery flow velocity waveforms for the prediction of pre-eclampsia. Ultrasound Obstet Gynecol. 16:163–170PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  3. Aquilina J, Thompson O, Thilaganathan B, Harrington K (2001) Improved early prediction of pre-eclampsia by combining secondtrimester maternal serum inhibin-A and uterine artery Doppler. Ultrasound Obstet Gynecol. 17(6):477–484.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  4. Arabin B (1990) Doppler flow measurements in uertoplacental and fetal vessels. Pathophysiologal and clinical significance. Springer, Berlin Heidelberg New YorkGoogle Scholar
  5. Arduini D, Rizzo G, Romanini C, Mancuso S (1987) Utero-placental blood flow velocity waveforms as predictors of pregnancy-induced hypertension. Eur J Obstet Gynecol Reprod Biol 26:335–341PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  6. Bewley S, Cooper D, Campbell S (1991) Doppler investigation of uteroplacental blood flow resistance in the second trimester: a screening study for preeclampsia and intrauterine growth retardation. Br J Obstet Gynecol 98:871–879Google Scholar
  7. Bower S, Bewley S, Cambell S (1993) Improved prediction of preeclampsia by two-stage screening of uterine arteries using the early diastolic notch and color Doppler imaging. Obstet Gynecol 82:78–83PubMedGoogle Scholar
  8. Brosens IA (1977) Morphological changes in the utero-placental bed in pregnancy hypertension. Clin Obstet Gynaecol 4:573–593PubMedGoogle Scholar
  9. Brosens I, Robertson WB, Dixon HG (1967) The physiological response of the vessels of the placental bed to normal pregnancy. J Pathol Bacteriol 93:569PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  10. Brosens IA, Robertson WB, Dixon HG (1972) The role of the spiral arteries in the pathogenesis of preeclampsia. Obstet Gynecol Ann 1:177–191Google Scholar
  11. Campbell S, Pearce JMF, Hackett G, Cohen-Overbeck T, Hernandez J (1986) Qualitative assessment of uteroplacental blood flow: Early screening test for high-risk pregnancies. Obstet Gynecol 68:649–653PubMedGoogle Scholar
  12. Chambers SE, Johnstone FD, Muir BB, Hoskins P, Haddad NG, McDicken WN (1988) The effects of placental site on the arcuate artery flow velocity waveform. J Ultrasound Med 7:671–673PubMedGoogle Scholar
  13. Fendel H, Jörn H, Fendel M, Scheffen I, Funk A (1992) Doppler-Flussprofile bei hypertensiven Erkrankungen und Diabetes mellitus in der Schwangerschaft. Gynäkologe 25:297–305PubMedGoogle Scholar
  14. Fleischer A, Schulman H, Farmakides G, Bracero L, Grunfeld L, Rochelson B, Koenigsberg M (1986) Uterine artery Doppler velocimetry in pregnant women with hypertension. Am J Obstet Gynecol 154:806–813PubMedGoogle Scholar
  15. Födisch HJ (1977) Neue Erkenntnisse über die Orthologie und Pathologie der Plazenta. Enke, StuttgartGoogle Scholar
  16. Giles WB, Trudinger BJ, Baird PJ (1985) Fetal umbilical artery flow velocity waveforms and placental resistance: pathological correlation. Br J Obstet Gynecol 92:31–38Google Scholar
  17. Grab D (1994) Dopplersonographie. In: Risikofaktoren der kindlichen Entwicklung: Klinik und Perspektiven. Steinkopff, DarmstadtGoogle Scholar
  18. Grab D, Hütter W, Sterzik K, Terinde R (1992) Reference values for resistance index and pulsatility index of uteroplacental Doppler flow velocity waveforms based on 612 uneventful pregnancies. Gynecol Obstet Invest 34:82–87PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  19. Gudmundsson S, Marsal K (1988) Ultrasound Doppler evaluation of uteroplacental and fetoplacental circulation in pre-eclampsia. Arch Gynecol Obstet 243:199–206PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  20. Hanretty KP, Primrose MH, Neilson JP, Whittle M (1989) Pregnancy screening by Doppler uteroplacental and umbilical artery waveforms. Br J Obstet Gynecol 96:1163–1167Google Scholar
  21. Hanretty KP, Whittle MJ, Rubin PC (1988) Doppler uteroplacental waveforms in pregnancy-induced hypertension: a re-appraisal. Lancet 1:850–852PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  22. Harrington K, Cooper D, Lees C, Hecher K, Campbell S (1996) Doppler ultrasound of the uterine arteries: the importance of bilateral notching in the prediction of pre-eclampsia, placental abruption or delivery of a small-for-gestational-age baby. Ultrasound Obstet Gynecol. 7(3):182–188.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  23. Hofstaetter C, Dubiel M, Gudmundsson S, Marsal K (1996) Uterine artery color Doppler assisted velocimetry and perinatal outcome. Acta Obstet Gynecol Scand 75:612–619PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  24. Kurdi W, Campbell S, Aquilina J, England P, Harrington K (1998) The role of color Doppler imaging of the uterine arteries at 20 weeks’ gestation in stratifying antenatal care. Ultrasound Obstet Gynecol. 12(5)339–345.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  25. Martin AM, Bindra R, Curcio P, Cicero S, Nicolaides KH (2001) Screening for pre-eclampsia and fetal growth restriction by uterine artery Doppler at 11–14 weeks of gestation. Ultrasound Obstet Gynecol. 18(6)583–586PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  26. Papageorghiou AT, Yu CK, Bindra R, Pandis G, Nicolaides KH (2001) Multicenter screening for pre-eclampsia and fetal growth restriction by transvaginal uterine artery Doppler at 23 weeks of gestation. Ultrasound Obstet Gynecol. 18(5):441–449.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  27. Pearce JMF, Campbell S, Cohen-Overbeck T, Hackett G, Hernandez J, Roysten JP (1988) References, ranges and sources of variation for indices of pulsed Doppler flow velocity waveforms from the uertoplacental and fetal circulation. Br J Obstet Gynecol 95:248–256Google Scholar
  28. Pijnenborg R, Bland JM, Robertson WB, Brosens I (1983) Uteroplacental arterial changes related to interstitial trophoblast migration in early pregnancy. Placenta 4:397–414PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  29. Schaffer H, Lassmann R, Staudach A, Steiner H (1989) Aussagewert qualitativer Doppler-Untersuchungen in der Schwangerschaft. Ultraschall Klin Prax 4:8–15Google Scholar
  30. Schulman H, Ducey J, Farmakides G, Guzman E, Winter D, Penny B, Chi-Lee BS (1987) Uterine artery Doppler velocimetry: The significance of divergent systolic/diastolic ratios. Am J Obstet Gynecol 157:1539–1542PubMedGoogle Scholar
  31. Standardkommission der Arbeitsgemeinschaft Dopplersonographie und maternofetale Medizin (AGDMFM) (1996) Standards in der Perinatalmedizin-Doppler-Sonographie in der Schwangerschaft. Geburtshilfe Frauenheilkd 56:69–73Google Scholar
  32. Steel SA, Pearce JM, McParland P, Chamberlain GV (1990) Early Doppler ultrasound screening in prediction of hypertensive disorders or pregnancy. Lancet 335:1548–1551PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  33. Thaler I, Weiner Z, Itskovitz J (1992) Systolic or diastolic notch in uterine artery blood flow velocity waveforms in hypertensive pregnant patients: relationship to outcome. Obstet Gynecol 80:277–282PubMedGoogle Scholar
  34. Todros T, Ferrazzi E, Arduini D et al (1995) Performance of Doppler Ultrasonography as a screening test in low risk pregnancies: Results of a multicenter study. J Ultrasound Med 14:343–348PubMedGoogle Scholar
  35. Trudinger BJ, Cook CM (1990) Doppler umbilical and uterine flow waveforms in severe pregnancy hypertension. Br J Obstet Gynecol 97:142–148Google Scholar
  36. Trudinger BJ, Giles WB, Cook CM (1985) Uteroplacental blood flow velocity-time waveforms in normal and complicated pregnancy. Br J Obstet Gynecol 92:39–45Google Scholar
  37. Vainio M, Kujansuu E, Iso-Mustarjarvi M, Maenpaa J (2002) Low dose acetylsalicylic acid in prevention of pregnancy-induced hypertension and intrauterine growth retardation in women with bilateral uterine artery notches. BJOG. 109(2):161–167.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  38. Wallenberg HCS, Hutchinson DL, Schuler HM, Stolte LA, Janssens J (1973) The pathogenesis of placental infarction. Am J Obstet Gynecol 117:841–846Google Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer Medizin Verlag Heidelberg 2008

Authors and Affiliations

  • H. Steiner
    • 1
  1. 1.Universitätsklinik für Frauenheilkunde und GeburtshilfeParacelsus Medizinische Privatuniversität MüllnerSalzburg österreich

Personalised recommendations