ArticleEuropean journal of obstetrics & gynecology and reproductive biology: X2022
Cerebroplacental ratio and neonatal outcome in low-risk pregnancies with reduced fetal movement: A prospective study.
Article in European journal of obstetrics & gynecology and reproductive biology: X, 2022. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 1 paper.
What it found
Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.
The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.
The trial behind it
Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.
Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.
Who cites it
1 citing paper in PubMed.
- Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
5 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Objective: To evaluate the effectiveness of the cerebroplacental ratio (CPR) in predicting poor outcomes in low-risk pregnancies with reduced fetal movements (RFMs). Study Design: This prospective study included singleton pregnancies at 28-40 weeks, presenting with RFM but no additional risk factors. Sub analysis was performed for pregnancies between 36 and 40 weeks. Umbilical artery (UA) and middle cerebral artery (MCA) pulsatility indices (PIs) were measured, and the MCA-PI to UA-PI ratio (CPR) was calculated. Mode of delivery, gestational age, fetal monitoring category, Apgar score at 1 and 5 min, birth weight, presence of meconium, umbilical artery pH, and neonatal intensive care unit (NICU) admission were recorded. Women with good and poor outcomes were compared with doppler indices and pregnancy characteristics. Results: Of 96 women, 86 had good outcomes. There was no significant difference in UA-PI (0.871 ± 0.171 vs. 0.815 ± 0.179, P = 0.446), MCA-PI (1.778 ± 0.343 vs. 1.685 ± 0.373, P = 0.309), or CPR (2.107 ± 0.635 vs. 2.09 ± 0.597, P = 0.993) between the poor and good outcome groups. No difference was found in the location of the placenta, biophysical profile (BPP) score, fetal sex, or amniotic fluid index (AFI) at the time of presentation. The proportion of nulliparous patients in the poor outcome group was higher than that of multiparous patients. Sub analysis for 36-40 weeks revealed the same results; no significant difference in UA-PI (0.840 ± 0.184 Vs 0.815 ± 0.195, P = 0.599), MCA-PI (1.724 ± 0.403 vs. 1.626 ± 0.382, P = 0.523), or CPR (2.14 ± 0.762 vs. 2.08 ± 0.655, P = 0.931) between poor and good outcome groups. Conclusions: CPR is not predictive of neonatal outcome in low-risk pregnancies with RFM. However, a higher proportion of poor outcomes in nulliparous women warrants further investigation.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.