title: Contraction stress test versus ductus venosus Doppler evaluation for the prediction of adverse perinatal outcome in growth-restricted fetuses with non-reassuring non-stress test.
abstract: OBJECTIVE
  To compare Doppler evaluation of the ductus venosus and contraction stress test (CST) in the prediction of adverse perinatal outcome in growth-restricted fetuses with evidence of hemodynamic redistribution and a non-reactive non-stress test (NST).
  
  
  METHODS
  Data were collected from all singleton pregnancies seen in our Fetal Surveillance Unit who underwent antenatal monitoring for fetal growth restriction, non-reactive NST and arterial redistribution beyond 26 weeks of pregnancy. Patients were divided into four groups based on their CST and ductus venosus waveform results. Perinatal outcome was evaluated by means of four variables: the need for admission to the neonatal intensive care unit (NICU), need for neonatal intubation, an umbilical artery pH < 7.10 and significant neonatal morbidity. Outcome was compared among fetuses delivered within 3 days of their antenatal test. Logistic regression analysis was used to analyze the relation between predictive and outcome variables.
  
  
  RESULTS
  Sixty-eight women met the inclusion criteria for the study. The positive predictive value of the CST was 45% for admission to the NICU, 13% for significant neonatal morbidity, 26% for need of neonatal intubation and 29% for umbilical artery pH < 7.10. The positive predictive values of abnormal ductus venosus waveform (ADVW) were 81.5%, 26%, 48% and 55%. Groups with ADVW showed significantly poorer neonatal outcome. No significant differences were observed when CST results were compared. Logistic regression analysis showed that both gestational age at delivery and ADVW significantly predict the occurrence of adverse perinatal outcome.
  
  
  CONCLUSIONS
  In growth-restricted fetuses with hemodynamic redistribution and a non-reassuring NST, Doppler assessment of the ductus venosus correlates with adverse perinatal outcome. In this clinical situation there is no benefit of CST in terms of prediction.
authors.affiliation: Obstetrics and Gynecology Department, Hospital Clinic, Barcelona, Spain. frafig@iudexeus.uab.es
authors.forename: F
authors.initials: F
authors.lastname: Figueras
authors.forename: J M
authors.initials: JM
authors.lastname: Martínez
authors.forename: B
authors.initials: B
authors.lastname: Puerto
authors.forename: O
authors.initials: O
authors.lastname: Coll
authors.forename: V
authors.initials: V
authors.lastname: Cararach
authors.forename: J A
authors.initials: JA
authors.lastname: Vanrell
mesh_terms: D000704:Analysis of Variance; D005260:Female; D005316:Fetal Distress / Q000175:diagnosis* / Q000503:physiopathology; D005317:Fetal Growth Retardation / Q000175:diagnosis*; D005323:Fetal Monitoring; D005333:Fetus / Q000098:blood supply*; D006340:Heart Rate, Fetal; D006439:Hemodynamics; D006801:Humans; D016015:Logistic Models; D011237:Predictive Value of Tests; D011247:Pregnancy; D011256:Pregnancy Outcome; D012680:Sensitivity and Specificity; D018608:Ultrasonography, Doppler / Q000379:methods*; D016216:Ultrasonography, Prenatal / Q000379:methods*