Fetal tek umbilikal arter tanısı almış gebeliklerde prenatal ve neonatal sonuçlar
Yıl: 2021 Cilt: 29 Sayı: 3 Sayfa Aralığı: 217 - 224 Metin Dili: Türkçe DOI: 10.2399/prn.21.0293007 İndeks Tarihi: 20-05-2022
Fetal tek umbilikal arter tanısı almış gebeliklerde prenatal ve neonatal sonuçlar
Öz: Amaç: Çal›flman›n amac›, önceki çal›flmalarda çeliflkili flekilde bildi- rilmifl olan tek umbilikal arter ( single umbilical artery, SUA) tan›s› al- m›fl fetüslerin iliflkili anomalilerini ve sonuçlar›n› araflt›rmakt›r. Yöntem: Haziran 2018 ile Temmuz 2020 aras›nda, 35’i kompleks ve 47’si izole SUA (iSUA) olan fetal SUA’l› 82 gebenin ve fetal çift umbilikal arterli (double umbilical arteries, DUA) 100 gebenin verile- ri topland›. Üç grubun (iSUA, SUA ve DUA) maternal özellikleri ile gebelik ve fetal sonuçlar› karfl›laflt›r›ld›. Bulgular: SUA’l› 82 fetüsün 35’inde 64 majör yap›sal anomali, bu 35 fetüsün 20’sinde (%57.1) kardiyovasküler malformasyonlar, 12’sinde (%34.2) merkezi sinir sistemi malformasyonlar›, 10’unda (%28.5) ge- nitoüriner sistem malformasyonlar› ve 8’inde (%22.8) gastrointesti- nal sistem malformasyonlar› mevcuttu. ‹zole SUA, SUA olgular› için- de yer almaktayd›. DUA’l› 100 fetüs ile karfl›laflt›r›ld›¤›nda, SUA in- trauterin büyüme k›s›tl›l›¤› (IUGR), preterm do¤um, 7’den küçük Apgar skorlar› ve yenido¤an yo¤un bak›m ünitesine yat›fl için bir risk oluflturmakta idi. SUA olgular›nda fetal kromozomal veya yap›sal anomaliye sahip olmak; amniyotik s›v› anomalisi, gebeli¤in sonland›- r›lmas›, intrauterin fetal ölüm, erken neonatal ölüm ve düflük canl› do¤um oran› için risk faktörü idi. Sonuç: SUA, artan bir oranda fetal yap›sal ve kromozomal ano- maliye sahiptir. Bunlar aras›nda en çok tespit edilen kardiyak mal- formasyonlar ve ikinci en yayg›n olan ise merkezi sinir sistemi malformasyonlar›d›r. Fetal SUA’l› gebelikler; IUGR, preterm do- ¤um, düflük Apgar skorlar› ve yenido¤an yo¤un bak›m ünitesine yat›fl yönünden artm›fl riske sahiptir. Ek yap›sal veya kromozomal malformasyon varl›¤›, bu advers gebelik risklerinin oran›n› art›r- maktad›r. Bu nedenle bu olgular, özel fetal ultrasonografik organ taramas›na ve yak›n prenatal takibe gereksinim duymaktad›r.
Anahtar Kelime: Prenatal and neonatal outcomes of pregnancies diagnosed with fetal single umbilical artery
Öz: Objective: To investigate the associated anomalies and outcomes of fetuses diagnosed as having a single umbilical artery (SUA) which were reported inconsistently in previous studies. Methods: The data of 82 pregnancies with fetal SUA, 35 of which were complex, and 47 isolated SUA (iSUA) and 100 pregnancies with fetal double umbilical arteries (DUA) between June 2018 and July 2020 were retrieved. We compared the maternal characteristics, and pregnancy and fetal outcomes of the three groups (iSUA, SUA, and DUA). Results: Of 82 fetuses with SUA, 35 had 64 major structural abnor- malities. 20 of these 35 fetuses (57.1%) had cardiovascular malforma- tions, 12 (34.2%) had central nervous, 10 (28.5%) had genitourinary, and eight (22.8%) had gastrointestinal system malformations. Isolated SUA was present in SUA. Compared with the 100 DUA fetuses, SUA was a risk for intrauterine growth restriction (IUGR), preterm deliv- ery, Apgar scores of <7, and admission to the neonatal intensive care unit. Having fetal chromosomal or structural abnormalities, was a risk for amnion fluid abnormality, pregnancy termination, intrauterine fetal death, early neonatal death, and a low live birth ratio in SUA cases. Conclusion: SUA has an increased rate of fetal structural and chro- mosomal abnormalities. Among them, the most detected one is car- diac and the second most common one is central nervous system malformations. Pregnancies with fetal SUA have increased risk for IUGR, preterm delivery, low Apgar scores, and admission to the neonatal intensive care unit. The presence of additional structural or chromosomal malformations increases the rate of these adverse pregnancy risks. Thus, these cases warrant dedicated fetal ultrasono- graphic organ screening and close prenatal follow-up.
Anahtar Kelime: Belge Türü: Makale Makale Türü: Araştırma Makalesi Erişim Türü: Erişime Açık
- 1. Murphy-Kaulbeck L, Dodds L, Joseph KS, Van den Hof M. Single umbilical artery risk factors and pregnancy outcomes. Obstet Gynecol 2010;116:843–50. [PubMed] [CrossRef]
- 2. Hua M, Odibo AO, Macones GA, Roehl KA, Crane JP, Cahill AG. Single umbilical artery and its associated findings. Obstet Gynecol 2010;115:930–4. [PubMed] [CrossRef]
- 3. Persutte WH, Hobbins J. Single umbilical artery: a clinical enigma in modern prenatal diagnosis. Ultrasound Obstet Gynecol 1995;6:216–29. [PubMed] [CrossRef]
- 4. Van den Hof MC, Wilson RD; Diagnostic Imaging Committee, Society of Obstetricians and Gynaecologists of Canada; Genetics Committee, Society of Obstetricians and Gynaecologists of Canada. Fetal soft markers in obstetric ultra- sound. J Obstet Gynaecol Can 2005;27:592–636. [PubMed] [CrossRef]
- 5. Li TG, Wang G, Xie F, Yao JM, Yang L, Wang ML, et al. Prenatal diagnosis of single umbilical artery and postpartum outcome. Eur J Obstet Gynecol Reprod Biol 2020;254:6–10. [PubMed] [CrossRef]
- 6. Malova J, Bohmer D, Luha J, Pastorakova A, Cierna Z, Braxatorisova T. Single umbilical artery and reproduction loss- es in Slovak population: relation to karyotype and fetal anom- alies. Bratisl Lek Listy 2018;119:330–4. [PubMed] [CrossRef]
- 7. Kim HJ, Kim JH, Chay DB, Park JH, Kim MA. Association of isolated single umbilical artery with perinatal outcomes: sys- temic review and meta-analysis. Obstet Gynecol Sci 2017;60: 266–73. [PubMed] [CrossRef]
- 8. Voskamp BJ, Fleurke-Rozema H, Oude-Rengerink K, Snijders RJM, Bilardo CM, Mol BW, et al. Relationship of isolated sin- gle umbilical artery to fetal growth, aneuploidy and perinatal mortality: systematic review and meta-analysis. Ultrasound Obstet Gynecol 2013;42:622–8. [PubMed] [CrossRef]
- 9. Luo X, Zhai S, Shi N, Li M, Cui S, Xu Y, et al. The risk fac- tors and neonatal outcomes of isolated single umbilical artery in singleton pregnancy: a meta-analysis. Sci Rep 2017;7:7396. [PubMed] [CrossRef]
- 10. Friebe-Hoffmann U, Hiltmann A, Friedl TWP, Lato K, Hammer R, Janni W, et al. Prenatally diagnosed single umbil- ical artery (SUA) – Retrospective analysis of 1169 fetuses. Ultraschall Med 2019;40:221–9. [PubMed] [CrossRef]
- 11. Naveiro-Fuentes M, Carrillo-Badillo MP, Malde-Conde J, Gallo-Vallejo JL, Puertas-Prieto A. Perinatal outcomes in sin- gleton pregnancies with a single umbilical artery. J Matern Fetal Neonatal Med 2016;29:1562–5. [PubMed] [CrossRef]
- 12. Caldas LM, Liao A, Carvalho MH, Francisco RP, Zugaib M. Should fetal growth be a matter of concern in isolated single umbilical artery? Rev Assoc Med Bras (1992) 2014;60:125–30. [PubMed] [CrossRef]
- 13. Predanic M, Perni SC, Friedman A, Chervenak FA, Chasen ST. Fetal growth assessment and neonatal birth weight in fetuses with an isolated single umbilical artery. Obstet Gynecol 2005;105:1093–7. [PubMed] [CrossRef]
- 14. Battarbee AN, Palatnik A, Ernst LM, Grobman WA. Association of isolated single umbilical artery with small for gestational age and preterm birth. Obstet Gynecol 2015;126: 760–4. [PubMed] [CrossRef]
- 15. Gutvirtz G, Walfisch A, Beharier O, Sheiner E. Isolated single umbilical artery is an independent risk factor for perinatal mor- tality and adverse outcomes in term neonates. Arch Gynecol Obstet 2016;294:931–5. [PubMed] [CrossRef]
- 16. Shen N, Zhang W, Li G. Impact of isolated single umbilical artery on pregnancy outcome and delivery in full-term births. J Obstet Gynaecol Res 2016;42:399–403. [PubMed] [CrossRef]
- 17. O¤lak SC, Bademk›ran MH, Obut M. Predictor variables in the success of slow-release dinoprostone used for cervical ripening in intrauterine growth restriction pregnancies. J Gynecol Obstet Hum Reprod 2020;49:101739. [PubMed] [CrossRef]
- 18. Luo X, Zhai S, Shi N, Li M, Cui S, Xu Y, Ran L, Ren L, Hong T, Liu R. The risk factors and neonatal outcomes of isolated single umbilical artery in singleton pregnancy: a meta-analysis. Sci Rep 2017;7:7396. [PubMed] [CrossRef]
- 19. Trecet J. Ultrasound screening in the second trimester. In: Diaz Recasens J, editor. Prenatal diagnosis. Madrid: Ergon Editorial; 2010. p. 135–225.
- 20. Dias T, Sairam S, Kumarasiri S. Ultrasound diagnosis of fetal renal abnormalities. Best Pract Res Clin Obstet Gynaecol 2014;28:403–15. [PubMed] [CrossRef]
- 21. Badillo AT, Hedrick HL, Wilson RD, Danzer E, Bebbington MW, Johnson MP, et al. Prenatal ultrasonographic gastroin- testinal abnormalities in fetuses with gastroschisis do not cor- relate with postnatal outcomes. J Pediatr Surg 2008;43:647–53. [PubMed] [CrossRef]
- 22. Wang J, Ye Y, Xin T, Zhang X, Chen S, Wu Y, et al. Is echocardiography necessary for all single umbilical artery fetuses? A retrospective study in a selected Chinese population. J Obstet Gynaecol Res 2019;45:803–9. [PubMed] [CrossRef]
- 23. Granese R, Coco C, Jeanty P. The value of single umbilical artery in the prediction of fetal aneuploidy: findings in 12,672 pregnant women. Ultrasound Q 2007;23:117–21. [PubMed] [CrossRef]
- 24. Ebbing C, Kessler J, Moster D, Rasmussen S. Single umbilical artery and risk of congenital malformation: population-based study in Norway. Ultrasound Obstet Gynecol 2020;55:510–5. [PubMed] [CrossRef]
- 25. Khong TY, George K. Chromosomal abnormalities associated with a single umbilical artery. Prenat Diagn 1992;12:965–8. [PubMed] [CrossRef]
- 26. Burshtein S, Levy A, Holcberg G, Zlotnik A, Sheiner E. Is single umbilical artery an independent risk factor for perinatal mortali- ty? Arch Gynecol Obstet 2011;283:191–4. [PubMed] [CrossRef]
- 27. Baser E, Celik IH, Bilge M, Kasapoglu T, Isik DU, Yalvac ES, et al. Abnormal umblical artery Doppler is utilized for fetuses with intrauterine growth restriction birth at 28 0/7 – 33 6/7 ges- tational weeks. Fetal Pediatr Pathol 2020;39:467–75. [PubMed] [CrossRef]
- 28. Heifetz SA. Single umbilical artery. A statistical analysis of 237 autopsy cases and review of the literature. Perspect Pediatr Pathol 1984;8:345–78. [PubMed]
- 29. Mailath-Pokorny M, Worda K, Schmid M, Polterauer S, Bettelheim D. Isolated single umbilical artery: evaluating the risk of adverse pregnancy outcome. Eur J Obstet Gynecol Reprod Biol 2015;184:80–3. [PubMed] [CrossRef]
| APA | obut m, Kalayci Oncu A, YÜCEL ÇELİK Ö, Akay A, Ozcan G, AYNAOGLU YILDIZ G, iskender c, çağlar a (2021). Fetal tek umbilikal arter tanısı almış gebeliklerde prenatal ve neonatal sonuçlar. , 217 - 224. 10.2399/prn.21.0293007 |
| Chicago | obut mehmet,Kalayci Oncu Asya,YÜCEL ÇELİK ÖZGE,Akay Arife,Ozcan Guliz,AYNAOGLU YILDIZ GULSAH,iskender cantekin,çağlar ali turhan Fetal tek umbilikal arter tanısı almış gebeliklerde prenatal ve neonatal sonuçlar. (2021): 217 - 224. 10.2399/prn.21.0293007 |
| MLA | obut mehmet,Kalayci Oncu Asya,YÜCEL ÇELİK ÖZGE,Akay Arife,Ozcan Guliz,AYNAOGLU YILDIZ GULSAH,iskender cantekin,çağlar ali turhan Fetal tek umbilikal arter tanısı almış gebeliklerde prenatal ve neonatal sonuçlar. , 2021, ss.217 - 224. 10.2399/prn.21.0293007 |
| AMA | obut m,Kalayci Oncu A,YÜCEL ÇELİK Ö,Akay A,Ozcan G,AYNAOGLU YILDIZ G,iskender c,çağlar a Fetal tek umbilikal arter tanısı almış gebeliklerde prenatal ve neonatal sonuçlar. . 2021; 217 - 224. 10.2399/prn.21.0293007 |
| Vancouver | obut m,Kalayci Oncu A,YÜCEL ÇELİK Ö,Akay A,Ozcan G,AYNAOGLU YILDIZ G,iskender c,çağlar a Fetal tek umbilikal arter tanısı almış gebeliklerde prenatal ve neonatal sonuçlar. . 2021; 217 - 224. 10.2399/prn.21.0293007 |
| IEEE | obut m,Kalayci Oncu A,YÜCEL ÇELİK Ö,Akay A,Ozcan G,AYNAOGLU YILDIZ G,iskender c,çağlar a "Fetal tek umbilikal arter tanısı almış gebeliklerde prenatal ve neonatal sonuçlar." , ss.217 - 224, 2021. 10.2399/prn.21.0293007 |
| ISNAD | obut, mehmet vd. "Fetal tek umbilikal arter tanısı almış gebeliklerde prenatal ve neonatal sonuçlar". (2021), 217-224. https://doi.org/10.2399/prn.21.0293007 |
| APA | obut m, Kalayci Oncu A, YÜCEL ÇELİK Ö, Akay A, Ozcan G, AYNAOGLU YILDIZ G, iskender c, çağlar a (2021). Fetal tek umbilikal arter tanısı almış gebeliklerde prenatal ve neonatal sonuçlar. Perinatoloji Dergisi, 29(3), 217 - 224. 10.2399/prn.21.0293007 |
| Chicago | obut mehmet,Kalayci Oncu Asya,YÜCEL ÇELİK ÖZGE,Akay Arife,Ozcan Guliz,AYNAOGLU YILDIZ GULSAH,iskender cantekin,çağlar ali turhan Fetal tek umbilikal arter tanısı almış gebeliklerde prenatal ve neonatal sonuçlar. Perinatoloji Dergisi 29, no.3 (2021): 217 - 224. 10.2399/prn.21.0293007 |
| MLA | obut mehmet,Kalayci Oncu Asya,YÜCEL ÇELİK ÖZGE,Akay Arife,Ozcan Guliz,AYNAOGLU YILDIZ GULSAH,iskender cantekin,çağlar ali turhan Fetal tek umbilikal arter tanısı almış gebeliklerde prenatal ve neonatal sonuçlar. Perinatoloji Dergisi, vol.29, no.3, 2021, ss.217 - 224. 10.2399/prn.21.0293007 |
| AMA | obut m,Kalayci Oncu A,YÜCEL ÇELİK Ö,Akay A,Ozcan G,AYNAOGLU YILDIZ G,iskender c,çağlar a Fetal tek umbilikal arter tanısı almış gebeliklerde prenatal ve neonatal sonuçlar. Perinatoloji Dergisi. 2021; 29(3): 217 - 224. 10.2399/prn.21.0293007 |
| Vancouver | obut m,Kalayci Oncu A,YÜCEL ÇELİK Ö,Akay A,Ozcan G,AYNAOGLU YILDIZ G,iskender c,çağlar a Fetal tek umbilikal arter tanısı almış gebeliklerde prenatal ve neonatal sonuçlar. Perinatoloji Dergisi. 2021; 29(3): 217 - 224. 10.2399/prn.21.0293007 |
| IEEE | obut m,Kalayci Oncu A,YÜCEL ÇELİK Ö,Akay A,Ozcan G,AYNAOGLU YILDIZ G,iskender c,çağlar a "Fetal tek umbilikal arter tanısı almış gebeliklerde prenatal ve neonatal sonuçlar." Perinatoloji Dergisi, 29, ss.217 - 224, 2021. 10.2399/prn.21.0293007 |
| ISNAD | obut, mehmet vd. "Fetal tek umbilikal arter tanısı almış gebeliklerde prenatal ve neonatal sonuçlar". Perinatoloji Dergisi 29/3 (2021), 217-224. https://doi.org/10.2399/prn.21.0293007 |
