Hostname: page-component-8448b6f56d-qsmjn Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-04-23T09:13:01.804Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

MANAGEMENT OF REDUCED FETAL MOVEMENTS

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  29 November 2013

L E HIGGINS ,
E D JOHNSTONE  and
A E P HEAZELL
L E HIGGINS
Affiliation:
Maternal and Fetal Health Research Centre, St. Mary's Hospital, Central Manchester University Hospitals NHS Foundation Trust, ManchesterUK. Maternal and Fetal Health Research Centre, Manchester Academic Health Science Centre, University of Manchester, ManchesterUK.
E D JOHNSTONE
Affiliation:
Maternal and Fetal Health Research Centre, St. Mary's Hospital, Central Manchester University Hospitals NHS Foundation Trust, ManchesterUK. Maternal and Fetal Health Research Centre, Manchester Academic Health Science Centre, University of Manchester, ManchesterUK.
A E P HEAZELL*
Affiliation:
Maternal and Fetal Health Research Centre, St. Mary's Hospital, Central Manchester University Hospitals NHS Foundation Trust, ManchesterUK. Maternal and Fetal Health Research Centre, Manchester Academic Health Science Centre, University of Manchester, ManchesterUK.
*
A E P Heazell, PhD, Maternal and Fetal Health Research Centre, University of Manchester, Oxford Road, Manchester, M13 9PL, UK. Email: alexander.heazell@manchester.ac.uk
Get access Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Extract

Reduced fetal movement (RFM) is commonly defined as any reduction in maternal perception of fetal activity. Perceived fetal activity may be movement of limbs, trunk or head movement, but excludes fetal hiccoughs (as this is involuntary movement). The perception of fetal movement by an expectant mother is the first, and ongoing, non-sonographic indicator of fetal viability. The “normal” pattern of fetal movements varies from pregnancy to pregnancy, and often does not become established until 28 weeks’ gestation. Many babies have particularly active periods of the day, usually corresponding to periods of maternal rest and inactivity (which may in itself reflect increased maternal awareness of fetal movement). A variable percentage of sonographically observed fetal movements are perceived by prospective mothers (commonly 30–40%, although some studies report rates as high as 80%).

Type
Review Article
Information
Fetal and Maternal Medicine Review , Volume 24 , Issue 4 , November 2013 , pp. 201 - 231
Copyright
Copyright © Cambridge University Press 2013 

Access options

Get access to the full version of this content by using one of the access options below. (Log in options will check for institutional or personal access. Content may require purchase if you do not have access.)

References

1.Neldam, S. Fetal movements as an indicator of fetal well-being. Dan Med Bull 1983; 30 (4): 274–8.Google ScholarPubMed
2.Gettinger, A, Roberts, AB, Campbell, S. Comparison between subjective and ultrasound assessments of fetal movement. Br Med J 1978; 2 (6130): 88–90.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
3.D'Elia, A, Pighetti, M, Moccia, G, Santangelo, N. Spontaneous motor activity in normal fetuses. Early Hum Dev 2001; 65 (2): 139–47.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
4.Hertogs, K, Roberts, AB, Cooper, D, Griffin, DR, Campbell, S. Maternal perception of fetal motor activity. Br Med J 1979; 2 (6199): 1183–5.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
5.Lowery, CL, Russell, WA Jr., Wilson, JD, Walls, RC, Murphy, P. Time-quantified fetal movement detection with two-transducer data fusion. Am J Obstet Gynecol 1995; 172 (6): 1756–61; discussion 61–4.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
6.Neldam, S. Fetal movements. A comparison between maternal assessment and registration by means of dynamic ultrasound. Dan Med Bull 1982; 29 (4): 197–9.Google ScholarPubMed
7.Neldam, S, Jessen, P. Fetal movements registered by the pregnant woman correlated to retrospective estimations of fetal movements from cardiotocographic tracings. Am J Obstet Gynecol. 1980; 136 (8): 1051–4.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
8.Schmidt, W, Cseh, I, Hara, K, Kubli, F. Maternal perception of fetal movements and real-time ultrasound findings. J Perinat Med 1984; 12 (6): 313–8.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
9.Valentin, L, Marsal, K, Lindstrom, K. Recording of foetal movements: a comparison of three methods. J Med Eng Technol 1986; 10 (5): 239–47.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
10.Froen, JF. A kick from within: fetal movement counting and the cancelled progress in antenatal care. J Perinat Med 2004; 32 (1): 13–24.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
11.Dutton, PJ, Warrander, LK, Roberts, SA, Bernatavicius, G, Byrd, LM, Gaze, D, et al.Predictors of poor perinatal outcome following maternal perception of reduced fetal movements: a prospective cohort study. PLoS One 2012; 7 (7): e39784.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
12.Heazell, AE, Sumathi, GM, Bhatti, NR. What investigation is appropriate following maternal perception of reduced fetal movements? J Obstet Gynaecol 2005; 25 (7): 648–50.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
13.Whitworth, M, Fisher, M, Heazell, AEP. Reduced fetal movements. London: Royal College of Obstetricians and Gynaecologists; 2011.Google Scholar
14.Heazell, AE, Green, M, Wright, C, Flenady, V, Froen, JF. Midwives’ and obstetricians’ knowledge and management of women presenting with decreased fetal movements. Acta Obstet Gynecol Scand 2008; 87 (3): 331–9.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
15.Natale, R, Nasello-Paterson, C, Turliuk, R. Longitudinal measurements of fetal breathing, body movements, heart rate, and heart rate accelerations and decelerations at 24 to 32 weeks of gestation. Am J Obstet Gynecol 1985; 151 (2): 256–63.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
16.Pearson, JF, Weaver, JB. Fetal activity and fetal wellbeing: an evaluation. Br Med J 1976; 1 (6021): 1305–7.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
17.Tuffnell, DJ, Cartmill, RS, Lilford, RJ. Fetal movements: factors affecting their perception. Eur J Obstet Gynecol Reprod Biol 1991; 39 (3): 165–7.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
18.Fisher, M. Reduced fetal movements: a research-based project. Br J Midwifery 1999; 7 (12): 733–7.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
19.Hijazi, ZR, East, CE. Factors affecting maternal perception of fetal movement. Obstet Gynecol Surv 2009; 64 (7): 489–97; quiz 99.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
20.Mulder, EJ, Derks, JB, Visser, GH. Antenatal corticosteroid therapy and fetal behaviour: a randomised study of the effects of betamethasone and dexamethasone. Br J Obstet Gynaecol 1997; 104 (11): 1239–47.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
21.Jackson, JR, Kleeman, S, Doerzbacher, M, Lambers, DS. The effect of glucocorticosteroid administration on fetal movements and biophysical profile scores in normal pregnancies. J Matern Fetal Neonatal Med 2003; 13 (1): 50–3.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
22.Mahendru, A, Gajjar, K, Bashir, T. Idiopathic chronic fetomaternal haemorrhage presenting with reduced fetal movements. J Obstet Gynaecol 2007; 27 (8): 848–9.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
23.Wilcock, FM, Kadir, RA. Fetomaternal haemorrhage: a cause for unexplained neonatal death, presenting with reduced fetal movements and non-reactive fetal heart trace. J Obstet Gynaecol 2004; 24 (4): 456–7.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
24.Rayburn, WF, Barr, M. Activity patterns in malformed fetuses. Am J Obstet Gynecol 1982; 142 (8): 1045–8.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
25.Stoll, C, Ehret-Mentre, MC, Treisser, A, Tranchant, C. Prenatal diagnosis of congenital myasthenia with arthrogryposis in a myasthenic mother. Prenat Diagn 1991; 11 (1): 17–22.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
26.Hoffmann, R, Lohner, M, Bohm, N, Leititis, J, Helwig, H. Restrictive dermopathy: a lethal congenital skin disorder. Eur J Pediatr 1993; 152 (2): 95–8.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
27.Hsu, CD, Feng, TI, Crawford, TO, Johnson, TR. Unusual fetal movement in congenital myotonic dystrophy. Fetal Diagn Ther 1993; 8 (3): 200–2.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
28.Chen, H, Blackburn, WR, Wertelecki, W. Fetal akinesia and multiple perinatal fractures. Am J Med Genet 1995; 55 (4): 472–7.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
29.Heazell, AE, Martindale, EA. Can post-mortem examination of the placenta help determine the cause of stillbirth? J Obstet Gynaecol 2009; 29 (3): 225–8.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
30.Tantbirojn, P, Saleemuddin, A, Sirois, K, Crum, CP, Boyd, TK, Tworoger, S, et al.Gross abnormalities of the umbilical cord: related placental histology and clinical significance. Placenta 2009; 30 (12): 1083–8.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
31.Dugoff, L, Cuckle, HS, Hobbins, JC, Malone, FD, Belfort, MA, Nyberg, DA, et al.Prediction of patient-specific risk for fetal loss using maternal characteristics and first- and second-trimester maternal serum Down syndrome markers. Am J Obstet Gynecol 2008; 199 (3): 290 e1–6.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
32.Biswas, S, Ghosh, SK. Gross morphological changes of placentas associated with intrauterine growth restriction of fetuses: a case control study. Early Hum Dev 2008; 84 (6): 357–62.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
33.Sibley, CP, Turner, MA, Cetin, I, Ayuk, P, Boyd, CA, D'Souza, SW, et al.Placental phenotypes of intrauterine growth. Pediatr Res 2005; 58 (5): 827–32.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
34.Roje, D, Tomas, SZ, Prusac, IK, Capkun, V, Tadin, I. Trophoblast apoptosis in human term placentas from pregnancies complicated with idiopathic intrauterine growth retardation. J Matern Fetal Neonatal Med 2011; 24 (5): 745–51.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
35.Wallace, JM, Horgan, GW, Bhattacharya, S. Placental weight and efficiency in relation to maternal body mass index and the risk of pregnancy complications in women delivering singleton babies. Placenta 2012; 33 (8): 611–8.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
36.Lao, MR, Calhoun, BC, Bracero, LA, Wang, Y, Seybold, DJ, Broce, M, et al.The ability of the quadruple test to predict adverse perinatal outcomes in a high-risk obstetric population. J Med Screen 2009; 16 (2): 55–9.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
37.Salas, SP, Marshall, G, Gutierrez, BL, Rosso, P. Time course of maternal plasma volume and hormonal changes in women with preeclampsia or fetal growth restriction. Hypertension 2006; 47 (2): 203–8.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
38.Mills, TA, Wareing, M, Bugg, GJ, Greenwood, SL, Baker, PN. Chorionic plate artery function and Doppler indices in normal pregnancy and intrauterine growth restriction. Eur J Clin Invest 2005; 35 (12): 758–64.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
39.Mills, TA, Greenwood, SL, Johnstone, ED, Sibley, CP, Wareing, M. Mechanical and receptor mediated responses of placental chorionic plate arteries are altered in fetal growth restriction. Reprod Sci 2011; 19 (3): F–291.Google Scholar
40.Warrander, LK, Batra, G, Bernatavicius, G, Greenwood, SL, Dutton, P, Jones, RL, et al.Maternal perception of reduced fetal movements is associated with altered placental structure and function. PLoS One 2012; 7 (4): e34851.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
41.Gardosi, J, Kady, SM, McGeown, P, Francis, A, Tonks, A. Classification of stillbirth by relevant condition at death (ReCoDe): population based cohort study. BMJ 2005; 331 (7525): 1113–7.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
42.Korteweg, FJ, Gordijn, SJ, Timmer, A, Holm, JP, Ravise, JM, Erwich, JJ. A placental cause of intra-uterine fetal death depends on the perinatal mortality classification system used. Placenta 2008; 29 (1): 71–80.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
43.Andonotopo, W, Kurjak, A. The assessment of fetal behavior of growth restricted fetuses by 4D sonography. J Perinat Med 2006; 34 (6): 471–8.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
44.Saastad, E, Winje, BA, Stray Pedersen, B, Froen, JF. Fetal movement counting improved identification of fetal growth restriction and perinatal outcomes: a multi-centre, randomized, controlled trial. PLoS One 2011; 6 (12): e28482.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
45.Warrander, LK, Heazell, AE. Identifying placental dysfunction in women with reduced fetal movements can be used to predict patients at increased risk of pregnancy complications. Med Hypotheses 2011; 76 (1): 17–20.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
46.Heazell, AE, Froen, JF. Methods of fetal movement counting and the detection of fetal compromise. J Obstet Gynaecol 2008; 28 (2): 147–54.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
47.Efkarpidis, S, Alexopoulos, E, Kean, L, Liu, D, Fay, T. Case-control study of factors associated with intrauterine fetal deaths. MedGenMed 2004; 6 (2): 53.Google ScholarPubMed
48.Grant, A, Elbourne, D, Valentin, L, Alexander, S. Routine formal fetal movement counting and risk of antepartum late death in normally formed singletons. Lancet 1989; 2 (8659): 345–9.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
49.Leader, LR, Baillie, P, Van Schalkwyk, DJ. Fetal movements and fetal outcome: a prospective study. Obstet Gynecol. 1981; 57 (4): 431–6.Google ScholarPubMed
50.Pearson, JF, Weaver, JB. Fetal activity and fetal wellbeing: an evaluation. Br Med J 1976; 1 (6021): 1305–7.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
51.Sadovsky, E, Ohel, G, Havazeleth, H, Steinwell, A, Penchas, S. The definition and the significance of decreased fetal movements. Acta Obstet Gynecol Scand 1983; 62 (5): 409–13.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
52.Moore, TR, Piacquadio, K. A prospective evaluation of fetal movement screening to reduce the incidence of antepartum fetal death. Am J Obstet Gynecol 1989; 160 (5 Pt 1): 1075–80.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
53.Valentin, L, Marsal, K, Wahlgren, L. Subjective recording of fetal movements. III. Screening of a pregnant population; the clinical significance of decreased fetal movement counts. Acta Obstet Gynecol Scand 1986; 65 (7): 753–8.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
54.CEMACH. Perinatal mortality 2007. London: CEMACH; 2009.Google Scholar
55.Maulik, D (ed.). Doppler ultrasound in obstetrics and gynaecology. New York: Springer; 1997.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
56.Mangesi, L, Hofmeyr, GJ. Fetal movement counting for assessment of fetal wellbeing. Cochrane Database Syst Rev. 2007; (1): CD004909.Google Scholar
57.Lobb, MO, Beazley, JM, Haddad, NG. A controlled study of daily fetal movement counts in the prevention of stillbirths. J Obstet Gynaecol 1985; 6 (2): 87–91.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
58.Westgate, J, Jamieson, M. Stillbirths and fetal movements. N Z Med J 1986; 99 (796): 114–6.Google ScholarPubMed
59.Braunholtz, DA, Edwards, SJ, Lilford, RJ. Are randomized clinical trials good for us (in the short term)? Evidence for a “trial effect”. J Clin Epidemiol 2001; 54 (3): 217–24.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
60.Promoting awareness fetal movements to reduce fetal mortality stillbirth, a stepped wedge cluster randomised trial. (AFFIRM). http://www.clinicaltrials.gov/ct2/show/NCT01777022. Accessed on 16 October 2013.Google Scholar
61.National Collaborating Centre for Women's and Children's Health. Antenatal care: routine care for the healthy pregnant woman. London: National Institute for Health and Clinical Excellence; 2008; Contract No. CG62.Google Scholar
62.Grivell, RM, Alfirevic, Z, Gyte, GM, Devane, D. Antenatal cardiotocography for fetal assessment. Cochrane Database Syst Rev 2010; (1): CD007863.Google Scholar
63.Daly, N, Brennan, D, Foley, M, O'Herlihy, C. Cardiotocography as a predictor of fetal outcome in women presenting with reduced fetal movement. Eur J Obstet Gynecol Reprod Biol 2011; 159 (1): 57–61.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
64.Tan, KH, Smyth, R. Fetal vibroacoustic stimulation for facilitation of tests of fetal wellbeing. Cochrane Database Syst Rev 2001;(1): CD002963.Google Scholar
65.Tan, KH, Sabapathy, A. Fetal manipulation for facilitating tests of fetal wellbeing. Cochrane Database Syst Rev 2001; (4): CD003396.Google Scholar
66.Neilson, JP. Fetal electrocardiogram (ECG) for fetal monitoring during labour. Cochrane Database Syst Rev 2006; 3: CD000116.Google Scholar
67.de Jong, CL, Gardosi, J, Dekker, GA, Colenbrander, GJ, van Geijn, HP. Application of a customised birthweight standard in the assessment of perinatal outcome in a high risk population. Br J Obstet Gynaecol 1998; 105 (5): 531–5.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
68.Carberry, AE, Gordon, A, Bond, DM, Hyett, J, Raynes-Greenow, CH, Jeffery, HE. Customised versus population-based growth charts as a screening tool for detecting small for gestational age infants in low-risk pregnant women. Cochrane Database Syst Rev 2011; (12): CD008549.Google Scholar
69.Gardosi, J, Francis, A. Controlled trial of fundal height measurement plotted on customised antenatal growth charts. Br J Obstet Gynaecol 1999; 106 (4): 309–17.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
70.Owen, P, Maharaj, S, Khan, KS, Howie, PW. Interval between fetal measurements in predicting growth restriction. Obstet Gynecol 2001; 97 (4): 499–504.Google ScholarPubMed
71.Gardosi, J, Francis, A. Controlled trial of fundal height measurement plotted on customised antenatal growth charts. Br J Obstet Gynaecol 1999; 106 (4): 309–17.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
72.Neilson, J. Symphysis-fundal height measurement in pregnancy. Cochrane Database Syst Rev. 1998;(1): CD000944.Google Scholar
73.Morse, K, Williams, A, Gardosi, J. Fetal growth screening by fundal height measurement. Best Pract Res Clin Obstet Gynaecol 2009; 23 (6): 809–18.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
74.Robson, SC, Martin, WL, Morris, RK. The investigation and management of the small-for-gestational-age fetus, 2nd edn. Longon: Royal College of Obstetricians and Gynaecologists; 2013.Google Scholar
75.Campbell, S, Wilkin, D. Ultrasonic measurement of fetal abdomen circumference in the estimation of fetal weight. Br J Obstet Gynaecol 1975; 82 (9): 689–97.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
76.Harding, K, Evans, S, Newnham, J. Screening for the small fetus: a study of the relative efficacies of ultrasound biometry and symphysiofundal height. Aust N Z J Obstet Gynaecol 1995; 35 (2): 160–4.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
77.Hargreaves, K, Cameron, M, Edwards, H, Gray, R, Deane, K. Is the use of symphysis-fundal height measurement and ultrasound examination effective in detecting small or large fetuses? J Obstet Gynaecol 2011; 31 (5): 380–3.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
78.Dudley, NJ. A systematic review of the ultrasound estimation of fetal weight. Ultrasound Obstet Gynecol 2005; 25 (1): 80–9.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
79.Melamed, N, Yogev, Y, Meizner, I, Mashiach, R, Bardin, R, Ben-Haroush, A. Sonographic fetal weight estimation: which model should be used? J Ultrasound Med 2009; 28 (5): 617–29.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
80.Burd, I, Srinivas, S, Pare, E, Dharan, V, Wang, E. Is sonographic assessment of fetal weight influenced by formula selection? J Ultrasound Med 2009; 28 (8): 1019–24.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
81.Kurmanavicius, J, Burkhardt, T, Wisser, J, Huch, R. Ultrasonographic fetal weight estimation: accuracy of formulas and accuracy of examiners by birth weight from 500 to 5000 g. J Perinat Med 2004; 32 (2): 155–61.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
82.Hadlock, FP, Harrist, RB, Sharman, RS, Deter, RL, Park, SK. Estimation of fetal weight with the use of head, body, and femur measurements: a prospective study. Am J Obstet Gynecol 1985; 151 (3): 333–7.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
83.Schild, RL, Maringa, M, Siemer, J, Meurer, B, Hart, N, Goecke, TW, et al.Weight estimation by three-dimensional ultrasound imaging in the small fetus. Ultrasound Obstet Gynecol 2008; 32 (2): 168–75.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
84.Nabhan, AF, Abdelmoula, YA. Amniotic fluid index versus single deepest vertical pocket as a screening test for preventing adverse pregnancy outcome. Cochrane Database Syst Rev 2008; (3): CD006593.Google Scholar
85.Bardakci, M, Balci, O, Acar, A, Colakoglu, MC. Comparison of modified biophysical profile and doppler ultrasound in predicting the perinatal outcome at or over 36 weeks of gestation. Gynecol Obstet Invest 2010; 69 (4): 245–50.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
86.Baschat, AA, Gembruch, U, Harman, CR. The sequence of changes in Doppler and biophysical parameters as severe fetal growth restriction worsens. Ultrasound Obstet Gynecol 2001; 18 (6): 571–7.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
87.Madazli, R, Sen, C, Uludag, S, Ocak, V. Doppler dynamics: their clinical significance and relationship with fetal blood gases and pH measurements. J Obstet Gynaecol 2001; 21 (5): 448–52.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
88.Chang, TC, Robson, SC, Spencer, JA, Gallivan, S. Prediction of perinatal morbidity at term in small fetuses: comparison of fetal growth and Doppler ultrasound. Br J Obstet Gynaecol 1994; 101 (5): 422–7.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
89.Oros, D, Figueras, F, Cruz-Martinez, R, Meler, E, Munmany, M, Gratacos, E. Longitudinal changes in uterine, umbilical and fetal cerebral Doppler indices in late-onset small-for-gestational age fetuses. Ultrasound Obstet Gynecol 2011; 37 (2): 191–5.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
90.Alfirevic, Z, Stampalija, T, Gyte, GM. Fetal and umbilical Doppler ultrasound in high-risk pregnancies. Cochrane Database Syst Rev 2010;(1): CD007529.Google Scholar
91.Alfirevic, Z, Stampalija, T, Gyte, GM. Fetal and umbilical Doppler ultrasound in normal pregnancy. Cochrane Database Syst Rev 2010; (8): CD001450.Google Scholar
92.Korszun, P, Dubiel, M, Kudla, M, Gudmundsson, S. Doppler velocimetry for predicting outcome of pregnancies with decreased fetal movements. Acta Obstet Gynecol Scand. 2002; 81 (10): 926–30.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
93.Dubiel, M, Gudmundsson, S, Thuring-Jonsson, A, Maesel, A, Marsal, K. Doppler velocimetry and nonstress test for predicting outcome of pregnancies with decreased fetal movements. Am J Perinatol 1997; 14 (3): 139–44.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
94.Vintzileos, AM, Bors-Koefoed, R, Pelegano, JF, Campbell, WA, Rodis, JF, Nochimson, DJ, et al.The use of fetal biophysical profile improves pregnancy outcome in premature rupture of the membranes. Am J Obstet Gynecol 1987; 157 (2): 236–40.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
95.Lalor, JG, Fawole, B, Alfirevic, Z, Devane, D. Biophysical profile for fetal assessment in high risk pregnancies. Cochrane Database Syst Rev 2008;(1): CD000038.Google Scholar
96.Baschat, AA, Gembruch, U, Harman, CR. The sequence of changes in Doppler and biophysical parameters as severe fetal growth restriction worsens. Ultrasound Obstet Gynecol 2001; 18 (6): 571–7.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
97.O'Sullivan, O, Stephen, G, Martindale, E, Heazell, AE. Predicting poor perinatal outcome in women who present with decreased fetal movements. J Obstet Gynaecol. 2009; 29 (8): 705–10.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
98.Sinha, D, Sharma, A, Nallaswamy, V, Jayagopal, N, Bhatti, N. Obstetric outcome in women complaining of reduced fetal movements. J Obstet Gynaecol. 2007; 27 (1): 41–3.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
99.Heazell, AE, Bernatavicius, G, Roberts, SA, Garrod, A, Whitworth, MK, Johnstone, ED, et al.A randomised controlled trial comparing standard or intensive management of reduced fetal movements after 36 weeks gestation: a feasibility study. BMC Pregnancy Childbirth 2013; 13: 95.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
100.Froen, JF, Arnestad, M, Frey, K, Vege, A, Saugstad, OD, Stray-Pedersen, B. Risk factors for sudden intrauterine unexplained death: epidemiologic characteristics of singleton cases in Oslo, Norway, 1986–1995. Am J Obstet Gynecol 2001; 184 (4): 694–702.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
101.Gulmezoglu, AM, Crowther, CA, Middleton, P. Induction of labour for improving birth outcomes for women at or beyond term. Cochrane Database Syst Rev 2006; (4): CD004945.Google Scholar
102.Winje, BA, Roald, B, Kristensen, NP, Froen, JF. Placental pathology in pregnancies with maternally perceived decreased fetal movement: a population-based nested case-cohort study. PLoS One 2012; 7 (6): e39259.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
103.Rizzo, G, Capponi, A, Cavicchioni, O, Vendola, M, Arduini, D. First trimester uterine Doppler and three-dimensional ultrasound placental volume calculation in predicting pre-eclampsia. Eur J Obstet Gynecol Reprod Biol 2008; 138 (2): 147–51.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
104.Thame, M, Osmond, C, Wilks, R, Bennett, FI, Forrester, TE. Second-trimester placental volume and infant size at birth. Obstet Gynecol 2001; 98 (2): 279–83.Google ScholarPubMed
105.Hafner, E, Philipp, T, Schuchter, K, Dillinger-Paller, B, Philipp, K, Bauer, P. Second-trimester measurements of placental volume by three-dimensional ultrasound to predict small-for-gestational-age infants. Ultrasound Obstet Gynecol 1998; 12 (2): 97–102.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
106.Toal, M, Chan, C, Fallah, S, Alkazaleh, F, Chaddha, V, Windrim, RC, et al.Usefulness of a placental profile in high-risk pregnancies. Am J Obstet Gynecol 2007; 196 (4): 363 e1–7.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
107.Toal, M, Keating, S, Machin, G, Dodd, J, Adamson, SL, Windrim, RC, et al.Determinants of adverse perinatal outcome in high-risk women with abnormal uterine artery Doppler images. Am J Obstet Gynecol 2008; 198 (3): 330 e1–7.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
108.Toal, M, Chaddha, V, Windrim, R, Kingdom, J. Ultrasound detection of placental insufficiency in women with elevated second trimester serum alpha-fetoprotein or human chorionic gonadotropin. J Obstet Gynaecol Can 2008; 30 (3): 198–206.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
109.McGinty, P, Farah, N, Dwyer, VO, Hogan, J, Reilly, A, Turner, MJ, et al.Ultrasound assessment of placental function: the effectiveness of placental biometry in a low-risk population as a predictor of a small for gestational age neonate. Prenat Diagn 2012; 32: 620–6.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
110.Proctor, LK, Toal, M, Keating, S, Chitayat, D, Okun, N, Windrim, RC, et al.Placental size and the prediction of severe early-onset intrauterine growth restriction in women with low pregnancy-associated plasma protein-A. Ultrasound Obstet Gynecol 2009; 34 (3): 274–82.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
111.Salafia, CM, Yampolsky, M, Shlakhter, A, Mandel, DH, Schwartz, N. Variety in placental shape: when does it originate? Placenta 2012; 33 (3): 164–70.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
112.Yampolsky, M, Salafia, CM, Shlakhter, O, Haas, D, Eucker, B, Thorp, J. Centrality of the umbilical cord insertion in a human placenta influences the placental efficiency. Placenta 2009; 30 (12): 1058–64.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
113.Proctor, LK, Fitzgerald, B, Whittle, WL, Mokhtari, N, Lee, E, Machin, G, et al.Umbilical cord diameter percentile curves and their correlation to birth weight and placental pathology. Placenta 2013; 34 (1): 62–6.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
114.Hua, M, Odibo, AO, Macones, GA, Roehl, KA, Crane, JP, Cahill, AG. Single umbilical artery and its associated findings. Obstet Gynecol 2010; 115 (5): 930–4.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
115.Burshtein, S, Levy, A, Holcberg, G, Zlotnik, A, Sheiner, E. Is single umbilical artery an independent risk factor for perinatal mortality? Arch Gynecol Obstet 2011; 283 (2): 191–4.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
116.Hill, LM, Wibner, D, Gonzales, P, Chenevey, P. Validity of transabdominal sonography in the detection of a two-vessel umbilical cord. Obstet Gynecol 2001; 98 (5 Pt 1): 837–42.Google ScholarPubMed
117.Kirwan, D and the Fetal Anomlay Screening Programme (NHS FASP). NHS Fetal Anomaly Screening Programme. 18+0–20+6 Weeks Fetal Anomaly Screening Scan National Standards and Guidance for England. http://fetalanomaly.screening.nhs.uk/getdata.php?id=11218. Accessed on 17 October 2013.Google Scholar
118.Patil, NS, Kulkarni, SR, Lohitashwa, R. Umbilical cord coiling index and perinatal outcome. J Clin Diagn Res 2013; 7 (8): 1675–7.Google ScholarPubMed
119.Ernst, LM, Minturn, L, Huang, MH, Curry, E, Su, EJ. Gross patterns of umbilical cord coiling: correlations with placental histology and stillbirth. Placenta 2013; 34 (7): 583–8.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
120.Chitra, T, Sushanth, YS, Raghavan, S. Umbilical coiling index as a marker of perinatal outcome: an analytical study. Obstet Gynecol Int 2012; (2012): 213689.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
121.Pathak, S, Sebire, NJ, Hook, L, Hackett, G, Murdoch, E, Jessop, F, et al.Relationship between placental morphology and histological findings in an unselected population near term. Virchows Arch 2011; 459 (1): 11–20.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
122.Khong, TY. Evidence-based pathology: umbilical cord coiling. Pathology 2010; 42 (7): 618–22.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
123.Peres, LC, Taylor, D. Overestimation of umbilical cord coiling index with segmental versus total length assessment. Pediatr Dev Pathol 2012; 15 (4): 303–5.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
124.Grannum, PA, Berkowitz, RL, Hobbins, JC. The ultrasonic changes in the maturing placenta and their relation to fetal pulmonic maturity. Am J Obstet Gynecol 1979; 133 (8): 915–22.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
125.Viero, S, Chaddha, V, Alkazaleh, F, Simchen, MJ, Malik, A, Kelly, E, et al.Prognostic value of placental ultrasound in pregnancies complicated by absent end-diastolic flow velocity in the umbilical arteries. Placenta 2004; 25 (8–9): 735–41.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
126.Proctor, LK, Whittle, WL, Keating, S, Viero, S, Kingdom, JC. Pathologic basis of echogenic cystic lesions in the human placenta: role of ultrasound-guided wire localization. Placenta 2010; 31 (12): 1111–5.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
127.Moldenhauer, JS, Stanek, J, Warshak, C, Khoury, J, Sibai, B. The frequency and severity of placental findings in women with preeclampsia are gestational age dependent. Am J Obstet Gynecol 2003; 189 (4): 1173–7.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
128.Dugoff, L, Hobbins, JC, Malone, FD, Vidaver, J, Sullivan, L, Canick, JA, et al.Quad screen as a predictor of adverse pregnancy outcome. Obstet Gynecol 2005; 106 (2): 260–7.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
129.Pergament, E, Stein, AK, Fiddler, M, Cho, NH, Kupferminc, MJ. Adverse pregnancy outcome after a false-positive screen for Down syndrome using multiple markers. Obstet Gynecol 1995; 86 (2): 255–8.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
130.Dungan, JS, Shulman, LP, Phillips, OP, Simpson, JL, Meyer, NL, Grevengood, C, et al.Positive serum screening for fetal Down syndrome does not predict adverse pregnancy outcome in absence of fetal aneuploidy. J Soc Gynecol Investig 1994; 1 (1): 55–8.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
131.Letchworth, AT, Slattery, M, Dennis, KJ. Clinical application of human-placental-lactogen values in late pregnancy. Lancet 1978; 1 (8071): 955–7.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
132.Isouard, G. Value of total serum oestriol and human placental lactogen in the assessment of fetal-placental function. Aust N Z J Obstet Gynaecol 1979; 19 (2): 69–76.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
133.Zlatnik, FJ, Varner, MW, Hauser, KS. Human placental lactogen: a predictor of perinatal outcome? Obstet Gynecol 1979; 54 (2): 205–10.Google ScholarPubMed
134.Morrison, I, Green, P, Oomen, B. The role of human placental lactogen assays in antepartum fetal assessment. Am J Obstet Gynecol 1980; 136 (8): 1055–60.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
135.Newbern, D, Freemark, M. Placental hormones and the control of maternal metabolism and fetal growth. Curr Opin Endocrinol Diabetes Obes 2011; 18 (6): 409–16.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
136.Sorensen, S, von Tabouillot, D, Schioler, V, Greisen, G, Petersen, S, Larsen, T. Serial measurements of serum human placental lactogen (hPL) and serial ultrasound examinations in the evaluation of fetal growth. Early Hum Dev 2000; 60 (1): 25–34.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
137.Murao, F. Measurements of the fetal liver size, hormonal level and pregnancy outcome. Gynecol Obstet Invest 1991; 32 (3): 153–6.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
138.Heazell, AE, Bernatavicius, G, Warrander, L, Brown, MC, Dunn, WB. A metabolomic approach identifies differences in maternal serum in third trimester pregnancies that end in poor perinatal outcome. Reprod Sci 2012; 19 (8): 863–75.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
139.Chapell, LC, Duckworth, S, Griffin, M, Tarft, H, Seed, P, Redman, CW, et al.Plasma placental growth factor (PLGF) measurement in women presenting with suspected pre-eclampsia: the pelican study. Pregnancy Hypertens. 2012; 2 (3): 233–4.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
140.Poon, LC, Zaragoza, E, Akolekar, R, Anagnostopoulos, E, Nicolaides, KH. Maternal serum placental growth factor (PlGF) in small for gestational age pregnancy at 11(+0) to 13(+6) weeks of gestation. Prenat Diagn 2008; 28 (12): 1110–5.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
141.Akolekar, R, Zaragoza, E, Poon, LC, Pepes, S, Nicolaides, KH. Maternal serum placental growth factor at 11 + 0 to 13 + 6 weeks of gestation in the prediction of pre-eclampsia. Ultrasound Obstet Gynecol 2008; 32 (6): 732–9.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
142.Benton, SJ, Hu, Y, Xie, F, Kupfer, K, Lee, SW, Magee, LA, et al.Can placental growth factor in maternal circulation identify fetuses with placental intrauterine growth restriction? Am J Obstet Gynecol 2012; 206 (2): 163 e1–7.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
143.Giles, WB, Trudinger, BJ, Baird, PJ. Fetal umbilical artery flow velocity waveforms and placental resistance: pathological correlation. Br J Obstet Gynaecol 1985; 92 (1): 31–8.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
144.Trudinger, BJ, Giles, WB, Cook, CM, Bombardieri, J, Collins, L. Fetal umbilical artery flow velocity waveforms and placental resistance: clinical significance. Br J Obstet Gynaecol 1985; 92 (1): 23–30.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
145.Tuuli, MG, Odibo, AO. First- and second-trimester screening for preeclampsia and intrauterine growth restriction. Clin Lab Med 2010; 30 (3): 727–46.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
146.Cnossen, JS, Morris, RK, ter Riet, G, Mol, BW, van der Post, JA, Coomarasamy, A, et al.Use of uterine artery Doppler ultrasonography to predict pre-eclampsia and intrauterine growth restriction: a systematic review and bivariable meta-analysis. CMAJ 2008; 178 (6): 701–11.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
147.Li, H, Gudnason, H, Olofsson, P, Dubiel, M, Gudmundsson, S. Increased uterine artery vascular impedance is related to adverse outcome of pregnancy but is present in only one-third of late third-trimester pre-eclamptic women. Ultrasound Obstet Gynecol 2005; 25 (5): 459–63.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
148.Meler, E, Figueras, F, Bennasar, M, Gomez, O, Crispi, F, Gratacos, E. The prognostic role of uterine artery Doppler investigation in patients with severe early-onset preeclampsia. Am J Obstet Gynecol 2010; 202 (6): 559 e1–4.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
149.The GRIT Study Group. When do obstetricians recommend delivery for a high-risk preterm growth-retarded fetus? The GRIT Study Group. Growth Restriction Intervention Trial. Eur J Obstet Gynecol Reprod Biol 1996; 67 (2): 121–6.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
150.Prior, T, Mullins, E, Bennett, P, Kumar, S. Prediction of intrapartum fetal compromise using the cerebroumbilical ratio: a prospective observational study. Am J Obstet Gynecol 2013; 208 (2): 124 e1–6.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
151.Hershkovitz, R, Kingdom, JC, Geary, M, Rodeck, CH. Fetal cerebral blood flow redistribution in late gestation: identification of compromise in small fetuses with normal umbilical artery Doppler. Ultrasound Obstet Gynecol 2000; 15 (3): 209–12.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
152.Tchirikov, M, Rybakowski, C, Huneke, B, Schoder, V, Schroder, HJ. Umbilical vein blood volume flow rate and umbilical artery pulsatility as “venous-arterial index” in the prediction of neonatal compromise. Ultrasound Obstet Gynecol 2002; 20 (6): 580–5.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
153.Baschat, AA, Gembruch, U, Reiss, I, Gortner, L, Weiner, CP, Harman, CR. Relationship between arterial and venous Doppler and perinatal outcome in fetal growth restriction. Ultrasound Obstet Gynecol 2000; 16 (5): 407–13.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
154.Gudmundsson, S, Korszun, P, Olofsson, P, Dubiel, M. New score indicating placental vascular resistance. Acta Obstet Gynecol Scand 2003; 82 (9): 807–12.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
155.Bellotti, M, Pennati, G, De Gasperi, C, Bozzo, M, Battaglia, FC, Ferrazzi, E. Simultaneous measurements of umbilical venous, fetal hepatic, and ductus venosus blood flow in growth-restricted human fetuses. Am J Obstet Gynecol 2004; 190 (5): 1347–58.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
156.Hsieh, FJ, Kuo, PL, Ko, TM, Chang, FM, Chen, HY. Doppler velocimetry of intraplacental fetal arteries. Obstet Gynecol 1991; 77 (3): 478–82.Google ScholarPubMed
157.Mu, J, Kanzaki, T, Tomimatsu, T, Fukuda, H, Fujii, E, Takeuchi, H, et al.Investigation of intraplacental villous arteries by Doppler flow imaging in growth-restricted fetuses. Am J Obstet Gynecol 2002; 186 (2): 297–302.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
158.Lacin, S, Demir, N, Koyuncu, F, Goktay, Y. Value of intraplacental villous artery Doppler measurements in severe preeclampsia. J Postgrad Med 1996; 42 (4): 101–4.Google ScholarPubMed
159.Jaffe, R. Multigate spectral Doppler velocimetry for fast assessment of intraplacental fetal circulation: a preliminary study. J Ultrasound Med 1996; 15 (4): 309–12.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
160.Yagel, S, Anteby, EY, Shen, O, Cohen, SM, Friedman, Z, Achiron, R. Simultaneous multigate spectral Doppler imaging of the umbilical artery and placental vessels: novel ultrasound technology. Ultrasound Obstet Gynecol 1999; 14 (4): 256–61.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
161.Kirkinen, P, Kurmanavichius, J, Huch, A, Huch, R. Blood flow velocities in human intraplacental arteries. Acta Obstet Gynecol Scand 1994; 73 (3): 220–4.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
162.Rotmensch, S, Liberati, M, Luo, JS, Kliman, HJ, Gollin, Y, Bellati, U, et al.Color Doppler flow patterns and flow velocity waveforms of the intraplacental fetal circulation in growth-retarded fetuses. Am J Obstet Gynecol 1994; 171 (5): 1257–64.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
163.Jaffe, R, Woods, JR. Doppler velocimetry of intraplacental fetal vessels in the second trimester: improving the prediction of pregnancy complications in high-risk patients. Ultrasound Obstet Gynecol 1996; 8 (4): 262–6.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
164.Haberman, S, Bracero, LA, Byrne, DW. Spectral Doppler index mapping of the umbilicoplacental circulation and pregnancy outcome. Gynecol Obstet Invest 2004; 58 (1): 1–7.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
165.Rizzo, G, Silvestri, E, Capponi, A, Servadei, F, Pietrolucci, ME, Capece, A, et al.Histomorphometric characteristics of first trimester chorionic villi in pregnancies with low serum pregnancy-associated plasma protein-A levels: relationship with placental three-dimensional power doppler ultrasonographic vascularization. J Matern Fetal Neonatal Med 2011; 24 (2): 253–7.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
166.Odeh, M, Ophir, E, Maximovsky, O, Grinin, V, Bornstein, J. Placental volume and three-dimensional power Doppler analysis in prediction of pre-eclampsia and small for gestational age between Week 11 and 13 weeks and 6 days of gestation. Prenat Diagn 2011; 31 (4): 367–71.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
167.Odibo, AO, Goetzinger, KR, Huster, KM, Christiansen, JK, Odibo, L, Tuuli, MG. Placental volume and vascular flow assessed by 3D power Doppler and adverse pregnancy outcomes. Placenta 2011; 32 (3): 230–4.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
168.Hafner, E, Metzenbauer, M, Stumpflen, I, Waldhor, T, Philipp, K. First trimester placental and myometrial blood perfusion measured by 3D power Doppler in normal and unfavourable outcome pregnancies. Placenta 2010; 31 (9): 756–63.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
169.Rizzo, G, Capponi, A, Pietrolucci, ME, Capece, A, Arduini, D. First-trimester placental volume and vascularization measured by 3-dimensional power Doppler sonography in pregnancies with low serum pregnancy-associated plasma protein a levels. J Ultrasound Med 2009; 28 (12): 1615–22.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
170.Bozkurt, N, Basgul Yigiter, A, Gokaslan, H, Kavak, ZN. Correlations of fetal-maternal outcomes and first trimester 3-D placental volume/3-D power Doppler calculations. Clin Exp Obstet Gynecol 2010; 37 (1): 26–8.Google ScholarPubMed
171.Pomorski, M, Zimmer, M, Florjanski, J, Michniewicz, J, Wiatrowski, A, Fuchs, T, et al.Comparative analysis of placental vasculature and placental volume in normal and IUGR pregnancies with the use of three-dimensional power Doppler. Arch Gynecol Obstet 2012; 285 (2): 331–7.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
172.Raine-Fenning, NJ, Nordin, NM, Ramnarine, KV, Campbell, BK, Clewes, JS, Perkins, A, et al.Evaluation of the effect of machine settings on quantitative three-dimensional power Doppler angiography: an in-vitro flow phantom experiment. Ultrasound Obstet Gynecol 2008; 32 (4): 551–9.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
173.Raine-Fenning, NJ, Nordin, NM, Ramnarine, KV, Campbell, BK, Clewes, JS, Perkins, A, et al.Determining the relationship between three-dimensional power Doppler data and true blood flow characteristics: an in-vitro flow phantom experiment. Ultrasound Obstet Gynecol 2008; 32 (4): 540–50.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
174.Kudla, MJ, Alcazar, JL. Spatiotemporal image correlation with spherical sampling and high-definition flow: new 4-dimensional method for assessment of tissue vascularization changes during the cardiac cycle – reproducibility analysis. J Ultrasound Med 2012; 31 (1): 73–80.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
175.Welsh, AW, Hou, M, Meriki, N, Martins, WP. Spatiotemporal image correlation-derived volumetric Doppler impedance indices from spherical samples of the placenta: intraobserver reliability and correlation with conventional umbilical artery Doppler indices. Ultrasound Obstet Gynecol 2012; 40 (4): 431–6.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
176.Denison, FC, Semple, SI, Stock, SJ, Walker, J, Marshall, I, Norman, JE. Novel use of proton magnetic resonance spectroscopy (1HMRS) to non-invasively assess placental metabolism. PLoS One 2012; 7 (8): e42926.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
177.Alves, TC, Jarak, I, Carvalho, RA. NMR methodologies for studying mitochondrial bioenergetics. Methods Mol Biol 2012; 810: 281–309.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
178.Hibbeln, JF, Shors, SM, Byrd, SE. MRI: is there a role in obstetrics? Clin Obstet Gynecol 2012; 55 (1): 352–66.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
179.Abramowicz, JS, Sheiner, E. In utero imaging of the placenta: importance for diseases of pregnancy. Placenta 2007; 28(Suppl. A): S14–22.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
180.Andres, RL, Saade, G, Gilstrap, LC, Wilkins, I, Witlin, A, Zlatnik, F, et al.Association between umbilical blood gas parameters and neonatal morbidity and death in neonates with pathologic fetal acidemia. Am J Obstet Gynecol 1999; 181 (4): 867–71.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
181.Kakogawa, J, Sumimoto, K, Ho, E, Kanayama, N. Transabdominal measurement of oxygenation of the placenta by near-infrared spectroscopy. Semin Thromb Hemost 2005; 31 (3): 297–301.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
182.Kawamura, T, Kakogawa, J, Takeuchi, Y, Takani, S, Kimura, S, Nishiguchi, T, et al.Measurement of placental oxygenation by transabdominal near-infrared spectroscopy. Am J Perinatol 2007; 24 (3): 161–6.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
183.Kakogawa, J, Sumimoto, K, Kawamura, T, Minoura, S, Kanayama, N. Noninvasive monitoring of placental oxygenation by near-infrared spectroscopy. Am J Perinatol 2010; 27 (6): 463–8.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
184.Huen, I, Morris, DM, Wright, C, Parker, GJ, Sibley, CP, Johnstone, ED, et al.R(1) and R(2)* changes in the human placenta in response to maternal oxygen challenge. Magn Reson Med 2013; 70 (5): 1427–33.CrossRefGoogle Scholar