3
views
0
recommends
+1 Recommend
0 collections
    0
    shares
      • Record: found
      • Abstract: found
      • Article: not found

      Ultrasound for fetal assessment in early pregnancy

      systematic-review
      , ,
      Cochrane Pregnancy and Childbirth Group
      The Cochrane Database of Systematic Reviews
      John Wiley & Sons, Ltd

      Read this article at

      ScienceOpenPublisherPMC
      Bookmark
          There is no author summary for this article yet. Authors can add summaries to their articles on ScienceOpen to make them more accessible to a non-specialist audience.

          Abstract

          Background

          Diagnostic ultrasound is a sophisticated electronic technology, which utilises pulses of high‐frequency sound to produce an image. Diagnostic ultrasound examination may be employed in a variety of specific circumstances during pregnancy such as after clinical complications, or where there are concerns about fetal growth. Because adverse outcomes may also occur in pregnancies without clear risk factors, assumptions have been made that routine ultrasound in all pregnancies will prove beneficial by enabling earlier detection and improved management of pregnancy complications. Routine screening may be planned for early pregnancy, late gestation, or both. The focus of this review is routine early pregnancy ultrasound.

          Objectives

          To assess whether routine early pregnancy ultrasound for fetal assessment (i.e. its use as a screening technique) influences the diagnosis of fetal malformations, multiple pregnancies, the rate of clinical interventions, and the incidence of adverse fetal outcome when compared with the selective use of early pregnancy ultrasound (for specific indications).

          Search methods

          We searched the Cochrane Pregnancy and Childbirth Group's Trials Register (30 March 2015) and reference lists of retrieved studies.

          Selection criteria

          Published, unpublished, and ongoing randomised controlled trials that compared outcomes in women who experienced routine versus selective early pregnancy ultrasound (i.e. less than 24 weeks' gestation). We have included quasi‐randomised trials.

          Data collection and analysis

          Two review authors independently assessed trials for inclusion and risk of bias, extracted data and checked them for accuracy. We used the Review Manager software to enter and analyse data.

          Main results

          Routine/revealed ultrasound versus selective ultrasound/concealed: 11 trials including 37,505 women. Ultrasound for fetal assessment in early pregnancy reduces the failure to detect multiple pregnancy by 24 weeks' gestation (risk ratio (RR) 0.07, 95% confidence interval (CI) 0.03 to 0.17; participants = 295; studies = 7), moderate quality of evidence). Routine scans improve the detection of major fetal abnormality before 24 weeks' gestation (RR 3.46, 95% CI 1.67 to 7.14; participants = 387; studies = 2, moderate quality of evidence). Routine scan is associated with a reduction in inductions of labour for 'post term' pregnancy (RR 0.59, 95% CI 0.42 to 0.83; participants = 25,516; studies = 8), but the evidence related to this outcome is of low quality, because most of the pooled effect was provided by studies with design limitation with presence of heterogeneity (I² = 68%). Ultrasound for fetal assessment in early pregnancy does not impact on perinatal death (defined as stillbirth after trial entry, or death of a liveborn infant up to 28 days of age) (RR 0.89, 95% CI 0.70 to 1.12; participants = 35,735; studies = 10, low quality evidence). Routine scans do not seem to be associated with reductions in adverse outcomes for babies or in health service use by mothers and babies. Long‐term follow‐up of children exposed to scan in utero does not indicate that scans have a detrimental effect on children's physical or cognitive development.

          The review includes several large, well‐designed trials but lack of blinding was a problem common to all studies and this may have an effect on some outcomes. The quality of evidence was assessed for all review primary outcomes and was judged as moderate or low. Downgrading of evidence was based on including studies with design limitations, imprecision of results and presence of heterogeneity.

          Authors' conclusions

          Early ultrasound improves the early detection of multiple pregnancies and improved gestational dating may result in fewer inductions for post maturity. Caution needs to be exercised in interpreting the results of aspects of this review in view of the fact that there is considerable variability in both the timing and the number of scans women received.

          Plain language summary

          Routine compared with selective ultrasound in early pregnancy

          Ultrasound is an electronic technology that uses the reflection of pulses of high‐frequency sound to produce an image. Ultrasound may be used in a variety of circumstances during pregnancy. It has been assumed that the routine use of ultrasound in early pregnancy will result in the earlier detection of problems and improved management of pregnancy complications when compared with selective use for specific indications such as after clinical complications (e.g. bleeding in early pregnancy), or where there are concerns about fetal growth.

          The focus of this review is routine early pregnancy ultrasound (before 24 weeks). We included 11 randomised controlled trials involving 37,505 women. Early ultrasound improved the early detection of multiple pregnancies and improved gestational dating, which may result in fewer inductions for post maturity. The detection of fetal malformation was addressed in detail in only two of the trials. There was no evidence of a significant difference between the screened and control groups for perinatal death. Results do not show that routine scans reduce adverse outcomes for babies or lead to less health service use by mothers and babies. Long‐term follow‐up of children exposed to scans before birth did not indicate that scans have a detrimental effect on children's physical or intellectual development. Studies were carried out over three decades and technical advances in equipment, more widespread use of ultrasonography, and increased training and expertise of operators may have resulted in more effective sonography.

          Related collections

          Author and article information

          Contributors
          mkw@doctors.org.uk
          Journal
          Cochrane Database Syst Rev
          Cochrane Database Syst Rev
          14651858
          10.1002/14651858
          The Cochrane Database of Systematic Reviews
          John Wiley & Sons, Ltd (Chichester, UK )
          1469-493X
          14 July 2015
          July 2015
          7 July 2015
          : 2015
          : 7
          : CD007058
          Affiliations
          St Mary's Hospital Central Manchester and Manchester Children's University Hospitals NHS Trust Hathersage Road Manchester UK M13 0JH
          Corniche Hospital Abu Dhabi United Arab Emirates
          St Mary's Hospital deptDepartment of Obstetrics & Gynaecology Oxford Road Manchester UK M13 9WL
          Article
          PMC6464767 PMC6464767 6464767 CD007058.pub3 CD007058
          10.1002/14651858.CD007058.pub3
          6464767
          26171896
          99e2f939-c3de-428a-b20b-9180e6b27b5f
          Copyright © 2015 The Cochrane Collaboration. Published by John Wiley & Sons, Ltd.
          History
          Categories
          Pregnancy & childbirth
          Fetal assessment before labour

          Comments

          Comment on this article