TY - JOUR
T1 - Prognostic accuracy of cerebroplacental ratio and middle cerebral artery Doppler for adverse perinatal outcome
T2 - systematic review and meta-analysis
AU - Vollgraff Heidweiller-Schreurs, C. A.
AU - De Boer, M. A.
AU - Heymans, M. W.
AU - Schoonmade, L. J.
AU - Bossuyt, P. M.M.
AU - Mol, B. W.J.
AU - De Groot, C. J.M.
AU - Bax, C. J.
N1 - Funding Information:
1Department of Obstetrics and Gynecology, VU University Medical Center, Amsterdam, The Netherlands; 2Department of Epidemiology and Biostatistics, VU University Medical Center, Amsterdam, The Netherlands; 3Department of Medical Library, Vrije Universiteit Amsterdam, Amsterdam, The Netherlands; 4Department of Clinical Epidemiology, Biostatistics and Bioinformatics, Academic Medical Center, University of Amsterdam, Amsterdam, The Netherlands; 5Department of Obstetrics and Gynecology, The Robinson Institute, School of Medicine, University of Adelaide, Adelaide, Australia; 6The South Australian Health and Medical Research Institute, Adelaide, Australia; 7Department of Obstetrics and Gynecology, Academic Medical Center, University of Amsterdam, Amsterdam, The Netherlands
PY - 2018/3
Y1 - 2018/3
N2 - Objective: Doppler ultrasonographic assessment of the cerebroplacental ratio (CPR) and middle cerebral artery (MCA) is widely used as an adjunct to umbilical artery (UA) Doppler to identify fetuses at risk of adverse perinatal outcome. However, reported estimates of its accuracy vary considerably. The aim of this study was to review systematically the prognostic accuracies of CPR and MCA Doppler in predicting adverse perinatal outcome, and to compare these with UA Doppler, in order to identify whether CPR and MCA Doppler evaluation are of added value to UA Doppler. Methods: PubMed, EMBASE, the Cochrane Library and ClinicalTrials.gov were searched, from inception to June 2016, for studies on the prognostic accuracy of UA Doppler compared with CPR and/or MCA Doppler in the prediction of adverse perinatal outcome in women with a singleton pregnancy of any risk profile. Risk of bias and concerns about applicability were assessed using the QUADAS-2 (Quality Assessment of Diagnostic Accuracy Studies-2) tool. Meta-analysis was performed for multiple adverse perinatal outcomes. Using hierarchal summary receiver–operating characteristics meta-regression models, the prognostic accuracy of CPR vs MCA Doppler was compared indirectly, and CPR and MCA Doppler vs UA Doppler compared directly. Results: The search identified 4693 articles, of which 128 studies (involving 47 748 women) were included. Risk of bias or suboptimal reporting was detected in 120/128 studies (94%) and substantial heterogeneity was found, which limited subgroup analyses for fetal growth and gestational age. A large variation was observed in reported sensitivities and specificities, and in thresholds used. CPR outperformed UA Doppler in the prediction of composite adverse outcome (as defined in the included studies) (P < 0.001) and emergency delivery for fetal distress (P = 0.003), but was comparable to UA Doppler for the other outcomes. MCA Doppler performed significantly worse than did UA Doppler in the prediction of low Apgar score (P = 0.017) and emergency delivery for fetal distress (P = 0.034). CPR outperformed MCA Doppler in the prediction of composite adverse outcome (P < 0.001) and emergency delivery for fetal distress (P = 0.013). Conclusion: Calculating the CPR with MCA Doppler can add value to UA Doppler assessment in the prediction of adverse perinatal outcome in women with a singleton pregnancy. However, it is unclear to which subgroup of pregnant women this applies. The effectiveness of the CPR in guiding clinical management needs to be evaluated in clinical trials.
AB - Objective: Doppler ultrasonographic assessment of the cerebroplacental ratio (CPR) and middle cerebral artery (MCA) is widely used as an adjunct to umbilical artery (UA) Doppler to identify fetuses at risk of adverse perinatal outcome. However, reported estimates of its accuracy vary considerably. The aim of this study was to review systematically the prognostic accuracies of CPR and MCA Doppler in predicting adverse perinatal outcome, and to compare these with UA Doppler, in order to identify whether CPR and MCA Doppler evaluation are of added value to UA Doppler. Methods: PubMed, EMBASE, the Cochrane Library and ClinicalTrials.gov were searched, from inception to June 2016, for studies on the prognostic accuracy of UA Doppler compared with CPR and/or MCA Doppler in the prediction of adverse perinatal outcome in women with a singleton pregnancy of any risk profile. Risk of bias and concerns about applicability were assessed using the QUADAS-2 (Quality Assessment of Diagnostic Accuracy Studies-2) tool. Meta-analysis was performed for multiple adverse perinatal outcomes. Using hierarchal summary receiver–operating characteristics meta-regression models, the prognostic accuracy of CPR vs MCA Doppler was compared indirectly, and CPR and MCA Doppler vs UA Doppler compared directly. Results: The search identified 4693 articles, of which 128 studies (involving 47 748 women) were included. Risk of bias or suboptimal reporting was detected in 120/128 studies (94%) and substantial heterogeneity was found, which limited subgroup analyses for fetal growth and gestational age. A large variation was observed in reported sensitivities and specificities, and in thresholds used. CPR outperformed UA Doppler in the prediction of composite adverse outcome (as defined in the included studies) (P < 0.001) and emergency delivery for fetal distress (P = 0.003), but was comparable to UA Doppler for the other outcomes. MCA Doppler performed significantly worse than did UA Doppler in the prediction of low Apgar score (P = 0.017) and emergency delivery for fetal distress (P = 0.034). CPR outperformed MCA Doppler in the prediction of composite adverse outcome (P < 0.001) and emergency delivery for fetal distress (P = 0.013). Conclusion: Calculating the CPR with MCA Doppler can add value to UA Doppler assessment in the prediction of adverse perinatal outcome in women with a singleton pregnancy. However, it is unclear to which subgroup of pregnant women this applies. The effectiveness of the CPR in guiding clinical management needs to be evaluated in clinical trials.
KW - Doppler
KW - cerebroplacental ratio
KW - fetal growth restriction
KW - middle cerebral artery
KW - prognostic accuracy
UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/record.url?scp=85041574116&partnerID=8YFLogxK
U2 - 10.1002/uog.18809
DO - 10.1002/uog.18809
M3 - Review article
AN - SCOPUS:85041574116
SN - 0960-7692
VL - 51
SP - 313
EP - 322
JO - Ultrasound in Obstetrics and Gynecology
JF - Ultrasound in Obstetrics and Gynecology
IS - 3
ER -