Advertisement

Wertigkeit der Dopplersonographie im Vergleich zu anderen Überwachungsverfahren

  • J. Gnirs
Chapter

Zusammenfassung

In diesem Kapitel wird die Wertigkeit der Dopplersonographie im Abgleich mit anderen Überwachungsverfahren erörtert und die Pathophysiologie bei fetaler Beeinträchtigung erläutert. Zu den biophysikalischen Überwachungsmethoden gehören neben der Dopplersonographie die Kardiotokographie, der Non-Stress-Test (NST) und alle CTG-basierten Untersuchungsverfahren wie der Wehenbelastungstest bzw. der vibroakustische Simulationstest sowie die Kontrolle der fetalen Bewegungsaktivität und Verhaltenszustände. Außerdem wird der Stellenwert der Ultraschalldiagnostik und der hormonellen Schwangerschaftsüberwachung aufgezeigt.

Literatur

  1. ACOG Techn Bull No 9 (2000) Antepartum fetal surveillance. Int J Gynaecol Obstet 68:175–185CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  2. ACOG (2009) Practice Bulletin 106: Intrapartum Fetal Heart Rate Monitoring. Obstet Gynecol 114: 192–202CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  3. ACOG (2010) ACOG practice bulletin no 116. Management of intrapartum fetal heart rate tracings. Obstet Gynecol 116:1232–1240CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  4. ACOG (2014) ACOG Practice Bulletin No 145. Antepartum fetal surveillance. Obstet Gynecol 124: 182eeinCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  5. Alfirevic Z, Stampalija T, Gyte GML (2013) Fetal and umbilical Doppler ultrasound in high-risk pregnancies. Cochrane Database of Systematic Reviews, Issue 1, Art. No.: CD007529.  https://doi.org/10.1002/14651858. CD007529.pub3
  6. Anceschi MM, Piazze JJ, Vozzi G, Ruozi-Beretta A, Figliolini C, Cosmi EV (1999) Antepartum computerized CTG and neonatal acid-base status at birth. Int J Gynaecol Obstet 65: 267–272CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  7. Anceschi MM, Ruozi-Beretta A, Piazze JJ, Cosmi E, Cerekja A, Meloni P, Cosmi EV (2004) Computerized cardiotocography in the management of intrauterine growth restriction associated with Doppler velocimetry alterations. Int J Gynaecol Obstet 86: 365–370CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  8. Arabin B, Snyders R, Nicolaides KH, Versmold HK, Weitzel HK, Giffei J, Saling E (1993) Systematische antepartuale fetale Erhebungen („Safe“). Ein Konzept für die fetale Funktionsdiagnostik bei drohender Hypoxie. Geburtshilfe Frauenheilkd 53: 835‒842CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  9. Arduini D, Rizzo G, Romanini C (1993) The development of abnormal heart rate patterns after absent enddiastolic velocity in umbilical artery: analysis of risk factors. Am J Obstet Gynecol 168: 43‒50CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  10. Babazadeh R, Abdali K, Lotfalizadeh M, Tabatabaie HR, Kaviani M (2005) Diurnal nonstress test variations in the human fetus at risk. Int. J. Gynaecol Obstet. 90:189–192CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  11. Baschat AA, Viscardi RM, Hussey-Gardner B, Hashmi N, Harman C (2009) Infant neurodevelopment following fetal growth restriction: relationship with antepartum surveillance parameters. Ultrasound Obstet Gynecol 33: 44–50CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  12. Bayerische Arbeitsgemeinschaft für Qualitätssicherung – BAQ (2016) BAQ-Jahresauswertung 2015. www.baq-bayern.de/media/file/120.2015_161_BA_Gesamt.pdf (2008) BAQ-Jahresbericht 2008. www.baq-bayern.de/downloads/files/16_1_2008_online.pdf
  13. Bewley S, Chard T, Grudzinskas G, Cooper D, Campbell S (1992) Early prediction of uteroplacental complications of pregnancy using Doppler ultrasound, placental function tests and combination testing. Ultrasound Obstet Gynecol 2: 333‒337CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  14. Bistoletti P (1986) Fetal weight prediction by ultrasound measurements. A prospective study. Gynecol Obstet Invest 22: 79‒83CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  15. Bonnin P, Guyot B, Bailliart O, Benard C, Blot P, Martineaud JP (1992) Relationship between umbilical and fetal cerebral blood flow velocity waveforms and umbilical venous blood gases. Ultrasound Obstet Gynecol 2: 18‒22CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  16. Bricker L, Neilson JP, Dowswell T (2009) Routine ultrasound in late pregnancy (after 24 weeks’ gestation). Cochrane Database of Systematic Reviews 2008, Issue 4, Art. No.: CD001451.  https://doi.org/10.1002/14651858. CD001451.pub3
  17. Catanzarite VA, Rose BI (1987) Ultrasound in obstetric decision making. How accurate are late ultrasound scans in gestational age and fetal weight assessment? Am J Perinatol 4: 147‒151CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  18. Chambers SE, Hoskins PR, Haddad NG, Johnstone FD, McDicken WN, Muir BB (1989) A comparison of fetal abdominal circumference measurements and Doppler ultrasound in the prediction of small-for-date babies and fetal compromise. Br J Obstet Gynecol 96: 803‒808CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  19. Chauhan SP, Sanderson M, Hendrix NW, Magann EF, Devoe LD (1999) Perinatal outcome and amniotic fluid index in the antepartum and intrapartum periods: Ameta-analysis. Am J Obstet Gynecol 181 (6): 1473–1478CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  20. Clark SL, Sabey P, Jolley K (1989) Nonstress testing with acoustic stimulation and amniotic fluid volume assessment:5973 tests without unexpected fetal death. Am J Obstet Gynecol 160:694–697CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  21. Cousins LM, Poeltler DM, Faron S, Catanzarite V, Daneshmand S, Casele H (2012) Nonstress testing at < 32.0 weeks´gestation: a randomized trial comparing different assessment criteria. Am J Obstet Gynecol 207:311.e1-311.e7CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  22. Cruz-Martinez R, Figueras F, Hernandez-Andrade E, Oros D, Gratacos E (2011) Fetal brain Doppler to predict cesarean delivery for nonreassuring fetal status in term small-for-gestational-age fetuses.Obstet Gynecol 117: 618–626CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  23. Dawes GS, Moulden M, Redman CWG (1992) Short term fetal heart rate variation, decelerations, and umbilical flow velocity waveforms before labour. Obstet Gynecol 80: 673–678PubMedGoogle Scholar
  24. Devoe L, Golde S, Kilman Y, Morton D, Shea K, Waller J (2000) A comparison of visual analyses of intrapartum fetal heart rate tracings according to the new national institute of child health and human development guidelines with computer analyses by an automated fetal heart rate monitoring system. Am J Obstet Gynecol 183: 361–366CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  25. Devoe LD (2008) Antenatal fetal assessment: contraction stress test, nonstress test, vibroacoustic stimulation, amniotic fluid volume, biophysical profile, and modified biophysical profile – an overview. Semin Perinatol 32 (4): 247–252CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  26. Dudenhausen JW (1989) Schwangerschaftsüberwachung bei fetaler Wachstumsretardierung unter besonderer Berücksichtigung der hormonellen Überwachungsverfahren. In: Bolte A, Wolff F (Hrsg) Hochrisikoschwangerschaft — Diagnose, Therapie, Prognose für Mutter und Kind. Steinkopff, Darmstadt, S 65‒74Google Scholar
  27. East CE, Smyth RMD, Leader LR, Henshall NE, Colditz PB, Tan KH (2013) Vibroacoustic stimulation for fetal assessment in labour in the presence of a nonreassuring fetal heart rate trace. Cochrane Database Syst Rev 1: CD004664Google Scholar
  28. Enkin MW, Keirse MJNC, Renfrew MJ, Neilson JP (1996) Guide to effective care in pregnancy and childbirth, 2nd edn. Cochrane Pregnancy & Childbirth Database 1996, 2nd IssueGoogle Scholar
  29. Farmakides G, Weiner Z (1995) Computerized analysis of the fetal heart rate. Clin Obstet Gynecol 38:112–20CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  30. Galazios G, Tripsianis G, Tsikouras P, Koutlaki N, Liberis V (2010) Fetal distress evaluation using and analyzing the variables of antepartum computerized cardiotocography. Arch Gynecol Obstet 281: 229–233CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  31. Garcia GS, Mariani Neto C, Araujo Júnior E, Garcia RL, Nardozza LM, Moron AF (2008) Fetal acidemia prediction through short-term variation assessed by antepartum computerized cardiotocography in pregnant women with hypertension syndrome. Arch Gynecol Obstet 278 (2): 125–128CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  32. Gardosi J, Chang A, Kalyan B, Sahota D, Symonds EM (1992) Customised antenatal growth charts. Lancet 339: 283‒287CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  33. Gávai M, Hargitai B, Váradi V, Belics Z, Csapó Z, Hajdú J, Hauzman E, Berkes E, Papp Z (2008) Prenatally diagnosed fetal brain injuries with known antenatal etiologies. Fetal Diagn Ther 23 (1): 18–22CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  34. Gnirs J (1995) Kineto-Kardiotokographie: Automatische Detektion der fetalen Bewegungsaktivität als integraler Bestandteil antepartualer CTG-Registrierungen und ihre Bedeutung für die fetale Zustandsdiagnostik. Habilitationsschrift, Universität MünchenGoogle Scholar
  35. Gnirs J (2002) Läßt sich durch vibroakustische Stimulation des Feten die Zuverlässigkeit der Kardiotokographie verbessern? Gynäkol Prax 26: 613–617Google Scholar
  36. Gnirs J, Boos R, Hoth H, Auer L, Schmidt W (1987) Intracavitäre Schall- und Lichtmessung im schwangeren Uterus. Arch Gynecol Obstet 242: 760‒762CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  37. Gnirs J, Schelling M, Dehganshoar M, Schneider KTM, Graeff H (1997) Fetale Zustandsdiagnostik bei Terminüberschreitungen: Ein Methodenvergleich unter besonderer Berücksichtigung des Wehenbelastungstests. Perinat Med 9: 118Google Scholar
  38. Gnirs J, Schelling M, Kolben M, Schneider KTM (1998) Referenzkurven für das fetale Bewegungsprofil. Geburtshilfe Frauenheilkd 58: 355‒362CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  39. Gnirs J, Schneider KTM, Möhrling D, Wilhelm O, Graeff H (1993) Dopplersonographie, Kineto-Kardiotokographie und fetale Stimulationstests bei Risikoschwangerschaften. Gynäkol Geburtshilfliche Rundsch 33(1): 309‒310CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  40. Gnirs J, Schneider KTM (1994) Fetale Verhaltenszustände und Bewegungsaktivität. Gynäkologe 27: 136‒145PubMedGoogle Scholar
  41. Gnirs J, Schneider KTM (1996) Diagnostik der fetalen Bewegungsaktivität, fetaler Stimulationstests und der Komplexitätsanalyse des fetalen EKGs als Ergänzung der intrapartalen CTG-Überwachung. Gynäkologe 29: 28‒44Google Scholar
  42. Gnirs J, Schneider KTM, Schiermeier S (2016) Geburtsüberwachung. In Schneider H, Husslein P, Schneider KTM (Hrsg.) Die Geburtshilfe, Springer 5. Auflage, 693–747CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  43. Grannum P, Berkowitz RI, Hobbins JC (1979) The ultrasonic changes in the maturing placenta and their relation to fetal pulmonic maturity. Am J Obstet Gynecol 133: 915‒922CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  44. Grivell RM, Alfirevic Z, Gyte GM, Devane D (2012) Antenatal cardiotocography for fetal assessment. Cochrane Database Syst Rev. Issue 12. Art. No.: CD007863.  https://doi.org/10.1002/14651858. CD007863.pub3
  45. Hansmann M, Hackelöer BJ, Staudach A (1985): Gewichtsschätzung. In: Hansmann M, Hackelöer BJ, Staudach A (Hrsg) Ultraschalldiagnostik in Geburtshilfe und Gynäkologie, Lehrbuch und Atlas. Springer, Berlin Heidelberg New York Tokio, S 162‒169CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  46. Heazell AE, Frøen JF (2008) Methods of fetal movement counting and the detection of fetal compromise. J Obstet Gynaecol 28 (2): 147–154CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  47. Hui D, Okun N, Murphy K, Kingdom J, Uleryk E, Shah PS (2012) Combinations of maternal serum markers to predict preeclampsia, small for gestational age, and stillbirth: a systematic review. J Obstet Gynaecol Can. 34(2):142–153CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  48. Jorch G (2013) Normalität und Prognose. In Jorch G (Hrsg) Fetoneonatale Neurologie (2013) Thieme Verlag S 20-28Google Scholar
  49. Karsdorp VHM, van Vugt JMG, van Geijn HP, Kostense PJ, Arduini D, Montenegro N, Todros T (1994) Clinical significance of absent or reversed end diastolic velocity waveforms in umbilical artery. Lancet 344: 1664‒1668CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  50. Kleinstein J, Gips H (1992) Biochemische Überwachung der Schwangerschaft. In: Künzel W, Wulf KH (Hrsg) Klinik der Frauenheilkunde und Geburtshilfe, Bd. 4, Schwangerschaft I. Urban Issue 3, Oxford: updated Software (1998), available from: BMJ Publishing Group, LondonGoogle Scholar
  51. Lalor JG, Fawole B, Alfirevic Z, Devane D (2008) Biophysical profile for fetal assessment in high risk pregnancies. Cochrane Database of Systematic Reviews, Issue 1. Art. No.: CD000038.  https://doi.org/10.1002/14651858, CD000038.pub2
  52. Magann EF, Chauhan SP, Doherty DA, Lutgendorf MA, Magann MI, Morrison JC (2007) A review of idiopathic hydramnios and pregnancy outcomes. Obstet Gynecol Surv 62 (12): 795–802CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  53. Manning FA, Harman CR (1990) The fetal biophysical profile. In: Eden RD, Boehm FK (eds) Assessment and care of the fetus, Appleton & Lange, Norwalk, CT, pp 385‒396Google Scholar
  54. McKenna D, Tharmaratnam S, Mahsud S, Dornan J (2005) Ultrasonic evidence of placental calcification at 36 weeks’ gestation: maternal and fetal outcomes. Acta Obstet Gynecol Scand 84: 7–10CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  55. Mehta SH, Blackwell SC, Hendler J, Bujold E, Sorokin Y, Ager J, Kraemer T, Sokol RJ (2005) Accuracy of estimated fetal weight in shoulder dystocia and neonatal birth injury. Am J Obstet Gynecol 192: H1877–1881CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  56. Moore TR, Cayle JE (1990) The amniotic fluid index in normal human pregnancy. Am J Obstet Gynecol 162: 1168–1173CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  57. Moran M, Ryan J, Higgins M, Brennan PC, McAuliffe FM (2011) Poor agreement between operators on grading of the placenta. J Obstet Gynaecol. 31(1):24–8CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  58. Morris RK, Cnossen JS, Langejans M, Robson SC, Kleijnen J, Ter Riet G, Mol BW, van der Post JA, Khan KS (2008) Serum screening with Down’s syndrome markers to predict pre-eclampsia and small for gestational age: systematicreview and meta-analysis. BMC Pregnancy Childbirth 4:8–33Google Scholar
  59. Nabhan AF, Abdelmoula YA (2009) Amniotic fluid index versus single deepest vertical pocket as a screening test for preventing adverse pregnancy outcome. Cochrane Database Syst. Rev. 2008, Issue 3. Art. No.: CD006593.  https://doi.org/10.1002/14651858.CD006593.pub2
  60. Neilson JP (1998) Hormonal placental function tests. In: Neilson JP, Crowther CA, Hodnett ED, Hofmeyr GJ, Keirse MJNC, Renfrew MJ (eds) Pregnancy and childbirth module of the cochrane database of systematic reviews, available in the cochrane library. The Cochrane Collaboration; Issue 3, Oxford: updated Software (1998), available from: BMJ Publishing Group, LondonGoogle Scholar
  61. Neilson JP (2012) Biochemical tests of placental function for assessment in pregnancy. Cochrane Database of Systematic Reviews. Issue 8, Art No: CD000108.  https://doi.org/10.1002/14651858.CD000108.pub22009) Biochemical tests of placental function for assessment in pregnancy. Cochrane Database of Systematic Reviews, 2003, Issue 2. Art. No.: CD000108.  https://doi.org/10.1002/14651858.CD000108
  62. Nelson KB, Ellenberg JH (1986) Antecedents of cerebral palsy. Multivariate analysis of risk. N Engl J Med 315: 81‒86CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  63. Nicolaides KH, Bilardo CM, Soothill PW, Campbell S (1988) Absence of end diastolic frequencies in umbilical artery: a sign of fetal hypoxia and acidosis. Br Med J 297: 1026‒1027CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  64. Nijhuis JG, Prechtl HFR, Martin CB, Bots RSGM (1882) Are there behavioural states in the human fetus? Early Hum Dev 6: 177‒195CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  65. Nyman M, Barr M, Westgren M (1992) A four-year follow-up of hearing and development in children exposed in utero to vibro-acoustic stimulation. Br J Obstet Gynaecol 99: 685–688CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  66. Paneth N, Hong T, Korzeniewski S (2006) The descriptive epidemiology of cerebral palsy. Clin Perinatol 33: 251–267CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  67. Pardi G, Cetin I, Marconi AM et al. (1993) Diagnostic value of blood sampling in fetuses with growth retardation. N Engl J Med 328: 692‒696CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  68. Pattison N, McCowan L (2006) Cardiotocography for antepartum fetal assessment. The Cochrane Database of Systematic Reviews, 4th Issue, Wiley, Chichester UKGoogle Scholar
  69. Paulus WE (1990) Die prognostische Bedeutung verschiedener biochemischer und biophysikalischer Methoden der Schwangerschaftsüberwachung im letzten Trimenon unter besonderer Berücksichtigung des Dehydroepiandrosteron-Sulfat-Belastungstests und dopplersonographischer Untersuchungen der plazentaren Durchblutung. Inauguraldissertation, Universität UlmGoogle Scholar
  70. Peck TM (1980) Physicians´subjectivity in evaluating oxytocin challenge tests. Obstet Gynecol 56: 13–16PubMedGoogle Scholar
  71. Peipert JF, Donnenfeld AE (1991) Oligohydramnios: a review. Obstet Gynecol Surv 46: 325‒339CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  72. Petrozella LN, Dashe JS, McIntire DD, Leveno KJ. (2011) Clinical significance of borderline amniotic fluid index and oligohydramnios in preterm pregnancy. Obstet Gynecol.117(2 Pt 1):338–342CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  73. Petrovic O, Finderle A, Prodan M, Skunca E, Prpic I, Zaputovic S (2009) Combination of vibroacoustic stimulation and acute variables of mFBP as a simple assessment method of low-risk fetuses. J Matern Fetal Neonatal Med. 22 (2): 152–156CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  74. Phelan JP, Smith CV, Broussard P, Small M (1987) Amniotic fluid volume assessment with the fourquadrant technique at 36‒42 weeks’ gestation. J Reprod Med 32: 540‒542PubMedGoogle Scholar
  75. Pillai M, James D (1990) The importance of the behavioural state in biophysical assessment of the term human fetus. Br J Obstet Gynaecol 97: 1130‒1134CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  76. Porto M (1987) Comparing and contrasting methods of fetal surveillance. Clin Obstet Gynecol 30: 956‒967CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  77. Proud J, Grant AM (1987) Third trimester placental grading by ultrasonography as a test of fetal wellbeing. Br Med J 294: 1641‒1647CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  78. Ray DA (1987) Biochemical fetal assessment. Clin Obstet Gynecol 30: 887‒898CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  79. Roberge S, Nicolaides KH, Demers S, Villa P, Bujold E (2013) Prevention of perinatal death and adverse perinatal outcome using low-dose aspirin: a meta-analysis. Ultrasound Obstet Gynecol 41: 491–499CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  80. Rooth G, Huch A, Huch R (1987) FIGO News: Guidelines for the use of fetal monitoring. Int J Gynecol Obstet 25: 159‒167CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  81. Royal College of Obstetricians and Gynaecologists – RCOG (2001) The use and interpretation of cardiotocography in intrapartum fetal surveillance. Evidence-based Clinical Guideline Number 8Google Scholar
  82. Rosen MG, Dickinson JC (1992) The incidence of cerebral palsy. Am J Obstet Gynecol 167: 417‒423CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  83. Roza SJ, Steegers EA, Verburg BO, Jaddoe VW, Moll HA, Hofman A, Verhulst FC, Tiemeier H (2008) What is spared by fetal brain-sparing? Fetal circulatory redistribution and behavioral problems in the general population. Am J Epidemiol 168 (10): 1145–52CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  84. Royal College of Obstetricians and Gynaecologists – RCOG (2001) The use and interpretation of cardiotocography in intrapartum fetal surveillance. Evidence-based Clinical Guideline Number 8Google Scholar
  85. Schneider KTM (1986) Das uterovaskuläre Syndrom der Schwangeren unter besonderer Berücksichtigung der aufrechten Körperhaltung. Habilitationsschrift, Universität MünchenGoogle Scholar
  86. Schneider KTM (1993a) IUGR — Probleme der Diagnostik. In: Schmidt W (Hrsg) Jahrbuch der Gynäkologie und Geburtshilfe. Biermann; Zülpich, S 113‒123Google Scholar
  87. Schneider KTM (1993b) Dopplersonographie: Patientensicherheit und Einbindung der Methode in das klinische Management. Gynäkol Geburtshilfliche Rundsch 33: 113‒115CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  88. Schneider KTM, Deckardt R, Graeff H, Huch A, Huch R (1987) Ist mütterliches Stehen ein physiologischer fetaler Streßtest? Arch Gynecol Obstet 242: 733‒735CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  89. Schneider KTM, Butterwegge M, Daumer M, Dudenhausen J, Gonser M, Husslein P, Hecher K, Jensen A, Rath W, Schmidt S, Vetter K, Zimmermann R (2013) Anwendung des CTG während Schwangerschaft und Geburt. DGGG, AGMFM, DGPM, AWMF Register-Nr 015/036 S1Google Scholar
  90. Schneider KTM, Gnirs J, Schiermeier S (2016) Antepartuale Überwachung. In: Schneider H, Husslein P, Schneider KTM (Hrsg) Die Geburtshilfe, 5. Auflage, Springer Medizin Verlag, Heidelberg, S. 217–254CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  91. Shanks A, Tuuli M, Schaecher C, Odibo AO, Rampersad R (2011) Assessing the optimal definition of oligohidramnios associated with adverse neonatal outcomes. J Ultrasound Med 30: 303–307CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  92. Sim D, Beattie RB, Dornan JC (1993) Evaluation of biophysical fetal assessment in high-risk pregnancy to assess ultrasound parameters suitable for screening in the low-risk population. Ultrasound Obstet Gynecol 3: 11‒17CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  93. Smith CV, Phelan JP, Platt LD, Broussard P, Paul RH (1986) Fetal acoustic stimulation testing. II. A randomized clinical comparison with the nonstress test. Am J Obstet Gynecol 155:131–134CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  94. Smith GC, Shah I, White IR, Pell JP, Crossley JA, Dobbie R (2007). Maternal and biochemical predictors of antepartum stillbirth among nulliparous women in relation to gestational age of fetal death. Br J Obstet Gynaecol 114 (6): 705–714CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  95. Soothill PW, Ajayi RA, Campbell S, Nicolaides KH (1993) Prediction of morbidity in small and normally grown fetuses by fetal heart rate variability, biophysical profile score and umbilical artery Doppler studies. Br J Obstet Gynecol 100: 742‒745CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  96. Spernol R, Hecher K, Szalay S (1989) Wertigkeit von fetalen Blutflussmessungen bei intrauteriner Wachstumsretardierung im Vergleich zu E3- und HPL-Bestimmungen. Geburtshilfe Frauenheilkd 49: 463‒465CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  97. Steiner H, Spitzer D, Schaffer H, Batka M, Staudach A (1993) Diagnostische Wertigkeit der Dopplersonographie. Gynäkol Geburtshilfliche Rundsch 33(1): 109‒112CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  98. Street P, Dawes GS, Moulden M, Redman CWG (1991) Short term variation in abnormal antenatal fetal heart rate records. Am J Obstet Gynecol 165: 515–523CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  99. Tan KH, Smyth R (2010) Fetal vibroacoustic stimulation for facilitation of tests of fetal wellbeing. Cochrane Database of Systematic Reviews, 2001,Issue 1, Art. No.: CD002963,  https://doi.org/10.1002/14651858. CD002963
  100. Thacker SB, Berkelman RL (1986) Assessing the diagnostic accuracy and efficacy of selected antepartum fetal surveillance techniques. Obstet Gynaecol Surv 41: 121‒141CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  101. Tyrrell SN, Lilford RJ, MacDonald HN, Nelson EJ, Porter J, Gupta JK (1990) Randomized comparison of routine vs highly selective use of Doppler ultrasound and biophysical scoring to investigate high risk pregnancies. Br J Obstet Gynaecol 97: 909‒916CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  102. Ultraschallrichtlinien (1995) Ultraschallrichtlinien. Dtsch Ärztebl 92: 311‒313Google Scholar
  103. Vintzileos AM, Gaffrey SE, Salinger LM, Campbell W, Nochimson D (1987) The relationship among the fetal biophysical score, umbilical cord pH, and APGAR scores. Am J Obstet Gynecol 157: 627‒631CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  104. Vintzileos AM, Campbell WA, Feinstein SJ, Lodeiro JG, Weinbaum PJ, Nochimson DJ (1987) The fetal biophysical profile in pregnancies with grade III placentas. Am J Perinatol 4: 90‒93CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  105. Vintzileos AM, Campbell WA, Rodis JF (1989) Fetal biophysical profile scoring: current status. Clin Perinatol 16: 661‒689CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  106. Vintzileos AM, Tsapanos V (1992) Biophysical assessment of the fetus. Ultrasound Obstet Gynecol 2: 33‒143CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  107. Voigt M, Schneider KT, Jahrig K (1996) Analyse des Geburtengutes des Jahrgangs 1992 der Bundesrepublik Deutschland. Teil 1: Neue Perzentilwerte für die Körpermaße von Neugeborenen. Geburtshilfe Frauenheilkd 56: 550–558CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  108. Wolf HT, Hegaard HK, Greisen G, Huusom L, Hedegaard M.J (2012) Treatment with magnesium sulphate in pre-term birth: a systematic review and meta-analysis of observational studies. Obstet Gynaecol. 32(2):135–40CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  109. Yoon BH, Romero R, Roh CR et al. (1993) Relationship between the fetal biophysical profile score, umbilical artery Doppler velocimetry, and fetal blood acid-base status determined by cordocentesis. Am J Obstet Gynecol 169: 1586‒1594CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer-Verlag GmbH Deutschland 2018

Authors and Affiliations

  • J. Gnirs
    • 1
  1. 1.Clinica Ginecologia y Obstetricia BendinatBendinat, CalviaSpanien

Personalised recommendations