Skip to main content

Thank you for visiting nature.com. You are using a browser version with limited support for CSS. To obtain the best experience, we recommend you use a more up to date browser (or turn off compatibility mode in Internet Explorer). In the meantime, to ensure continued support, we are displaying the site without styles and JavaScript.

  • Original Article
  • Published:

Dye-Determined Amniotic Fluid Volume and Intrapartum/Neonatal Outcome

Abstract

OBJECTIVE: To ascertain if a dye-determined amniotic fluid volume was predictive of intrapartum and perinatal outcome.

MATERIALS AND METHODS: The low and normal amniotic fluid volumes (<5th percentile and ≥5th percentile for gestational age) and the raw dye-determined amniotic fluid distributions were correlated with 10 clinical outcome measures in 74 pregnancies.

RESULTS: In this observational study, median gestational age at delivery was 36 weeks (range 26 to 41) and 16 deliveries were for fetal distress (14 Cesarean and two forceps). There were no differences between the outcomes of pregnancies with low and normal amniotic fluid volumes for any of the clinical outcomes (variable decelerations influencing delivery, p=0.381; late decelerations, p=0.875; Cesarean births for fetal intolerance of labor, p=0.259; intrauterine growth restriction, p=0.998; or umbilical cord arterial pH<7.2, p=0.259). Analogous results were obtained when the gestational age-adjusted amniotic fluid volumes were compared directly between the pregnancies with normal and abnormal outcomes. There was no difference between the mean amniotic fluid volumes in those pregnancies with variable decelerations influencing delivery (p=0.287), late decelerations (p=0.555), Cesarean births for fetal intolerance of labor (p=0.310), intrauterine growth restriction (p=0.267) or umbilical cord arterial pH<7.2, and the pregnancies without these intrapartum events. Reduced variability was more commonly observed in pregnancies with higher amniotic fluid volumes (p=0.038, 771 ml, 95% CI 468 to 1269, compared to those without normal variability 444 ml, 95% CI 374 to 526).

CONCLUSIONS: Dye-determined amniotic fluid volume does not appear to be predictive of adverse intrapartum and neonatal outcome.

This is a preview of subscription content, access via your institution

Access options

Buy this article

Prices may be subject to local taxes which are calculated during checkout

Similar content being viewed by others

References

  1. Rutherford SE, Phelan JP, Smith CV, Jacobs N . The four-quadrant assessment of amniotic fluid volume: an adjunct to antepartum fetal heart rate testing. Obstet Gynecol 1987;70:353–356.

    CAS  Google Scholar 

  2. Chamberlain PF, Manning FA, Morrison I, Lange CR, Lange IR . Ultrasound evaluation of amniotic fluid volume I. The relationship of marginal and decreased amniotic fluid volumes to perinatal outcomes. Am J Obstet Gynecol 1984;150:245–249.

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  3. Magann EF, Nolan TE, Hess LW, Martin RW, Whitworth NS, Morrison JC . Measurement of amniotic fluid volume: accuracy of ultrasonography techniques. Am J Obstet Gynecol 1992;167:1533–1537.

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  4. Magann EF, Morton ML, Nolan TE, Martin Jr JN, Whitworth NS, Morrison JC . Comparative efficacy of two sonographic measurements for the detection of aberrations in the amniotic fluid volume and the effect of amniotic fluid volume on pregnancy outcome. Obstet Gynecol 1994;83:959–963.

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  5. Dildy GA, Lira N, Moise KJ . Amniotic fluid assessment: comparison of ultrasonographic estimates versus direct measurements with a dye-dilution technique in human pregnancy. Am J Obstet Gynecol 1992;167:986.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  6. Horsager R, Lathan L, Leveno KJ, Riddle GD, Deter RL . Correlation of measured amniotic fluid volume and sonographic predictions of oligohydramnios. Obstet Gynecol 1994;83:955–958.

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  7. Magann EF, Whitworth NS, Rhodes PG, Bass JD, Chauhan SP, Morrison JC . Effect of amniotic fluid volume on neonatal outcome in diamniotic twin pregnancies. South Med J 1998;91:942–945.

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  8. Magann EF, Chauhan SP, Martin Jr JN . Is amniotic fluid volume status predictive of fetal acidosis at delivery? Aust NZ J Obstet Gynecol 2003;43:129–133.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  9. Brace RA, Wolf EJ . Normal amniotic fluid volume changes throughout pregnancy. Am J Obstet Gynecol 1989;161:382–388.

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  10. Magann EF, Bass D, Chauhan SP, Young RA, Whitworth NS, Morrison JC . Amniotic fluid volume changes in normal singleton pregnancies. Obstet Gynecol 1997;90:5524–5528.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  11. Magann EF, Whitworth NS, Terrone DA, Chauhan SP, Morrison JC . Dye-dilution techniques using aminohippurate sodium: do they accurately reflect amniotic fluid volume. J Matern Fetal Neonatal Med 2002;11:167–170.

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  12. Charles E, Jacoby HE . Preliminary data on the use of sodium aminohippurate to determine amniotic fluid volume. Am J Obstet Gynecol 1966;95:266–269.

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  13. S-plus Professional edition for Windows Networks. Seattle, Washington: StatSci Division; 2000.

  14. LogXact 5: Logistic regression Software Featuring Exact Methods. Cytel Software Corporation, Cambridge, MA; 2002.

  15. Sarno Jr AP, Ahn MO, Phelan JP . Intrapartum amniotic fluid volume at term. Association of ruptured membranes, oligohydramnios, and increased fetal risk. J Reprod Med 1990;35:719–723.

    Google Scholar 

Download references

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

Authors

Additional information

Supported in part by Vicksburg Hospital Medical Foundation, Vicksburg, Mississippi

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Cite this article

Magann, E., Doherty, D., Chauhan, S. et al. Dye-Determined Amniotic Fluid Volume and Intrapartum/Neonatal Outcome. J Perinatol 24, 423–428 (2004). https://doi.org/10.1038/sj.jp.7211122

Download citation

  • Published:

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1038/sj.jp.7211122

Search

Quick links