ArticleArchives of gynecology and obstetrics2024
Perinatal outcomes according to umbilical artery Doppler assessment among fetuses with congenital heart disease.
Article in Archives of gynecology and obstetrics, 2024. 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, 1 citations in OpenAlex.
- Fetal heart diseases and neonatal mortality: Risk factors and management.Archives of gynecology and obstetrics · 2024Article
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 at 4 institutions in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
purposeTo evaluate a cohort of fetuses with congenital heart disease (CHD) who underwent serial umbilical artery (UA) Doppler surveillance and assess perinatal outcome according to UA Doppler assessment.
methodsA retrospective cohort study of singleton fetuses with CHD at a single academic center was performed between 2018 and 2020. Fetuses with a chromosomal abnormality or growth restriction were excluded. We compared fetuses with normal versus abnormal UA Doppler assessment at any time in pregnancy. Abnormal UA Doppler assessment was defined as decreased end diastolic flow, determined by an elevated systolic/diastolic ratio >95th percentile for gestational age, or absent/reversed end diastolic flow. Logistic regression assessed the odds of fetuses with CHD and abnormal UA Doppler assessment having a composite adverse perinatal (defined as fetal, neonatal, or infant death), adjusting for relevant covariates.
resultsWe identified a cohort of 171 fetuses with CHD that met inclusion criteria. Of these, 154 (90%) had normal UA Doppler assessment and 17 (10%) had abnormal UA Doppler assessment throughout pregnancy. Maternal characteristics did not differ between groups except for maternal race and history of preeclampsia. There was no statistically significant difference in primary outcome between groups [14% (21/154) of fetuses with normal UA Doppler assessment had an adverse perinatal outcome compared to 24% (4/17) of those with abnormal UA Doppler assessment, p = 0.28].
conclusionUA Doppler assessment is unlikely to predict adverse perinatal outcome in normally grown, euploid singleton fetuses with CHD.
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.