Objectives: To investigate the screening performance and best threshold centile (5th vs. 10th) of the cerebroplacental ratio (CPR) in low-risk, term pregnancies to predict low birthweight and adverse intrapartum and neonatal outcomes in a term, low-risk population. Methods: This was a blinded, prospective, cross-sectional study of low-risk singleton pregnancies at term. Women attended fortnightly from 36 weeks for CPR and estimated fetal weight assessment. Intrapartum and neonatal outcomes were recorded. Primary outcomes assessed were low birthweight, cesarean section for intrapartum fetal compromise, and composite adverse neonatal outcome. Results: A total of 483 women participated in the study. The CPR 10th centile (1.48) threshold resulted in the best screening performance. Sensitivities for low birthweight, cesarean section for intrapartum fetal compromise, and composite adverse neonatal outcome of 41.9, 61.1, and 38.3% were achieved for false-positive rates of 17.7, 17.7, and 15.2%, respectively. The corresponding areas under the receiver operating characteristic curves were 0.62, 0.72, and 0.62. Conclusion: The CPR 10th centile resulted in the best screening performance, although this would be considered fair at best. The CPR 10th centile may be useful as part of a risk stratification tool for prediction of low birthweight and adverse intrapartum and neonatal outcomes.

Keywords:
Cerebroplacental ratio, Cerebroumbilical ratio, Low birthweight, Small for gestational age, Growth restriction, Cesarean section, Intrapartum fetal compromise, Fetal distress, Neonatal outcome
1.
Gardosi J, Madurasinghe V, Williams M, Malik A, Francis A: Maternal and fetal risk factors for stillbirth: population based study. BMJ 2013;346:f108.
2.
Morales-Rosello J, Khalil A: Fetal cerebral redistribution: a marker of fetal compromise regardless of fetal size. Ultrasound Obstet Gynecol 2015;46:385-388.
3.
Morales-Roselló J, Khalil A, Morlando M, Bhide A, Papageorghiou A, Thilaganathan B: Poor neonatal acid-base status in term fetuses with low cerebroplacental ratio. Ultrasound Obstet Gynecol 2015;45:156-161.
4.
Khalil AA, Morales-Rosello J, Elsaddig M, Khan N, Papageorghiou A, Bhide A, Thilaganathan B: The association between fetal Doppler and admission to neonatal unit at term. Am J Obstet Gynecol 2015;213:57.e51-e57.
5.
Khalil AA, Morales-Rosello J, Morlando M, Hannan H, Bhide A, Papageorghiou A, Thilaganathan B: Is fetal cerebroplacental ratio an independent predictor of intrapartum fetal compromise and neonatal unit admission? Am J Obstet Gynecol 2015;213:54-56.
6.
National Institute of Health and Care Excellence: The investigation and management of the small-for-gestational-age fetus (green-top guideline No. 31). London, NICE 2014, 2016.
7.
Dudley NJ: A systematic review of the ultrasound estimation of fetal weight. Ultrasound Obstet Gynecol 2005;25:80-89.
8.
Sovio U, White IR, Dacey A, Pasupathy D, Smith GCS: Screening for fetal growth restriction with universal third trimester ultrasonography in nulliparous women in the Pregnancy Outcome Prediction (POP) study: a prospective cohort study. Lancet 2015;386:2089-2097.
9.
Bricker L, Medley N, Pratt JJ: Routine ultrasound in late pregnancy (after 24 weeks' gestation). Cochrane Database Syst Rev 2015:CD001451.
10.
Odibo AO, Riddick C, Pare E, Stamilio DM, Macones GA: Cerebroplacental Doppler ratio and adverse perinatal outcomes in intrauterine growth restriction: evaluating the impact of using gestational age-specific reference values. J Ultrasound Med 2005;24:1223-1228.
11.
Morales-Roselló J, Khalil A, Morlando M, Papageorghiou A, Bhide A, Thilaganathan B: Changes in fetal Doppler indices as a marker of failure to reach growth potential at term. Ultrasound Obstet Gynecol 2014;43:303-310.
12.
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;208:124.e121-124.e126.
13.
Baschat AA, Gembruch U: The cerebroplacental Doppler ratio revisited. Ultrasound Obstet Gynecol 2003;21:124-127.
14.
Gramellini D, Folli MC, Raboni S, Vadora E, Merialdi A: Cerebral-umbilical Doppler ratio as a predictor of adverse perinatal outcome. Obstet Gynecol 1992;79:416-420.
15.
The Royal Australian and New Zealand College of Obstetricians and Gynaecologists: Intrapartum fetal surveillance. Clinical guideline (third edition), 2014, 2016.
16.
National Institute of Health and Care Excellence: Intrapartum Care: Interpretation of Cardiotocograph Traces (NICE guideline cg190). London, NICE, 2014, 2015.
17.
American College of Obstetricians and Gynecologists: ACOG Practice Bulletin No. 106: Intrapartum fetal heart rate monitoring: nomenclature, interpretation, and general management principles. Obstet Gynecol 2009;114:192-202.
18.
Fenton TR, Kim JH: A systematic review and meta-analysis to revise the Fenton growth chart for preterm infants. BMC Pediatr 2013;13:59.
19.
Khalil A, Morales-Roselló J, Townsend R, Morlando M, Papageorghiou A, Bhide A, Thilaganathan B: Value of third-trimester cerebroplacental ratio and uterine artery Doppler indices as predictors of stillbirth and perinatal loss: cerebroplacental ratio, uterine artery Doppler and stillbirth. Ultrasound Obstet Gynecol 2016;47:74-80.
20.
Triunfo S, Crispi F, Gratacos E, Figueras F: Prediction of delivery of small-for-gestational-age neonates and adverse perinatal outcomes by fetoplacental Doppler at 37 weeks' gestation. Ultrasound Obstet Gynecol 2017;49:364-371.
21.
Doctor BA, O'Riordan MA, Kirchner HL, Shah D, Hack M: Perinatal correlates and neonatal outcomes of small for gestational age infants born at term gestation. Am J Obstet Gynecol 2001;185:652-659.
22.
Parra-Saavedra M, Simeone S, Triunfo S, Crovetto F, Botet F, Nadal A, Gratacos E, Figueras F: Correlation between histological signs of placental underperfusion and perinatal morbidity in late-onset small-for-gestational-age fetuses. Ultrasound Obstet Gynecol 2015;45:149-155.
23.
McCowan L, Horgan RP: Risk factors for small for gestational age infants. Best Pract Res Clin Obstet Gynaecol 2009;23:779-793.
24.
Prior T, Paramasivam G, Bennett P, Kumar S: Are babies that fail to reach their genetic growth potential at increased risk of intra-partum fetal compromise? Ultrasound Obstet Gynecol 2015;46:460-464.
25.
Sheiner E, Levy A, Katz M, Hershkovitz R, Leron E, Mazor M: Gender does matter in perinatal medicine. Fetal Diagn Ther 2004;19:366-369.
26.
Weng YH, Yang CY, Chiu YW: Neonatal outcomes in relation to sex differences: a national cohort survey in Taiwan. Biol Sex Differ 2015;6:30.
27.
Grace L, Greer RM, Kumar S: Perinatal consequences of a category 1 caesarean section at term. BMJ Open 2015;5:e007248.
28.
Grimes DA, Schulz KF: Uses and abuses of screening tests. Lancet 2002;359:881-884.
29.
Brown MD, Reeves MJ: Interval likelihood ratios: another advantage for the evidence-based diagnostician. Ann Emerg Med 2003;42:292-297.
30.
DeVore GR: The importance of the cerebroplacental ratio in the evaluation of fetal well-being in SGA and AGA fetuses. Am J Obstet Gynecol 2015;213:5-15.
31.
Ilic D, O'Connor D, Green S, Wilt TJ: Screening for prostate cancer: an updated Cochrane systematic review. BJU Int 2011;107:882-891.
32.
Myers ER, Moorman P, Gierisch JM, Havrilesky LJ, Grimm LJ, Ghate S, Davidson B, Mongtomery RC, Crowley MJ, McCrory DC, Kendrick A, Sanders GD: Benefits and harms of breast cancer screening: a systematic review. JAMA 2015;314:1615-1634.
© 2017 S. Karger AG, Basel
2017
Copyright / Drug Dosage / Disclaimer
Copyright: All rights reserved. No part of this publication may be translated into other languages, reproduced or utilized in any form or by any means, electronic or mechanical, including photocopying, recording, microcopying, or by any information storage and retrieval system, without permission in writing from the publisher.
Drug Dosage: The authors and the publisher have exerted every effort to ensure that drug selection and dosage set forth in this text are in accord with current recommendations and practice at the time of publication. However, in view of ongoing research, changes in government regulations, and the constant flow of information relating to drug therapy and drug reactions, the reader is urged to check the package insert for each drug for any changes in indications and dosage and for added warnings and precautions. This is particularly important when the recommended agent is a new and/or infrequently employed drug.
Disclaimer: The statements, opinions and data contained in this publication are solely those of the individual authors and contributors and not of the publishers and the editor(s). The appearance of advertisements or/and product references in the publication is not a warranty, endorsement, or approval of the products or services advertised or of their effectiveness, quality or safety. The publisher and the editor(s) disclaim responsibility for any injury to persons or property resulting from any ideas, methods, instructions or products referred to in the content or advertisements.
You do not currently have access to this content.