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:

Association between an abnormal cerebroplacental ratio and the development of severe pre-eclampsia

Journal of Perinatology volume 35, pages 322–327 (2015)Cite this article

Subjects

Abstract

Objective:

To study the association between the cerebroplacental ratio (CPR) and the development of pre-eclampsia.

Study Design:

Three study groups were determined: Group 1—normal umbilical artery (UA; referent), Group 2—abnormal UA and normal CPR and Group 3—abnormal UA and an abnormal CPR. The primary outcome was the development of severe pre-eclampsia.

Results:

We included 270 women. Women in Group 3 had significantly elevated rates of severe pre-eclampsia versus those in Group 1 and Group 2, 52.5% versus 5.1% and 15.4%, respectively, (P<0.01), adjusted odds ratio 4.14 (95% confidence interval, 2.59 to 6.61). Kaplan–Meier analysis revealed earlier delivery in women with pre-eclampsia in Group 3 versus Group 1, Cox–Mantel hazard ratio 2.39 (1.17 to 4.88), log rank P=0.01.

Conclusion:

An abnormal CPR is associated with a higher rate severe pre-eclampsia with delivery at earlier gestational ages than with a normal UA or an abnormal UA, but normal CPR.

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

Access options

Buy this article

  • Purchase on Springer Link
  • Instant access to full article PDF
Buy now

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

Figure 1
Figure 2
Figure 3

Similar content being viewed by others

References

  1. American College of Obstetricians and Gynecologists. ACOG Practice Bulletin no. 134: fetal growth restriction. Obstet Gynecol 2013; 121 (5): 1122–1133.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  2. Pilliod RA, Cheng YW, Snowden JM, Doss AE, Caughey AB . The risk of intrauterine fetal death in the small-for-gestational-age fetus. Am J Obstet Gynecol 2012; 207 (4)318 e1–e6.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  3. Unterscheider J, O'Donoghue K, Daly S, Geary MP, Kennelly MM, McAuliffe FM et al. Fetal growth restriction and the risk of perinatal mortality-case studies from the multicenter PORTO study. BMC Pregnancy Childbirth 2014; 14 (1): 63.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  4. Baschat AA, Cosmi E, Bilardo CM, Wolf H, Berg C, Rigano S et al. Predictors of neonatal outcome in early-onset placental dysfunction. Obstet Gynecol 2007; 109 (2 Pt 1): 253–261.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  5. Rasmussen S, Irgens LM . History of fetal growth restriction is more strongly associated with severe rather than milder pregnancy-induced hypertension. Hypertension 2008; 51 (4): 1231–1238.

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  6. Odegård RA, Vatten LJ, Nilsen ST, Salvesen KA, Austgulen R . Preeclampsia and fetal growth. Obstet Gynecol 2000; 96 (6): 950–955.

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  7. Warrington JP, George EM, Palei AC, Spradley FT, Granger JP . Recent advances in the understanding of the pathophysiology of preeclampsia. Hypertension 2013; 62 (4): 666–673.

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  8. American College of Obstetricians and Gynecologists; Task Force on Hypertension in Pregnancy. Hypertension in pregnancy. Report of the American College of Obstetricians and Gynecologists’ Task Force on Hypertension in Pregnancy. Obstet Gynecol 2013; 122 (5): 1122–1131.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  9. Lees C, Marlow N, Arabin B, Bilardo CM, Brezinka C, Derks JB et al. Perinatal morbidity and mortality in early-onset fetal growth restriction: cohort outcomes of the trial of randomized umbilical and fetal flow in Europe (TRUFFLE). Ultrasound Obstet Gynecol 2013; 42 (4): 400–408.

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  10. Alfirevic Z, Neilson JP . Doppler ultrasonography in high-risk pregnancies: systematic review with meta-analysis. Am J Obstet Gynecol 1995; 172 (5): 1379–1387.

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  11. 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): 571–577.

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  12. Society for Maternal-Fetal Medicine Publications Committee Society for Maternal-Fetal Medicine Publications Committee, Berkley E Society for Maternal-Fetal Medicine Publications Committee, Chauhan SP Society for Maternal-Fetal Medicine Publications Committee, Abuhamad A . Doppler assessment of the fetus with intrauterine growth restriction. Am J Obstet Gynecol 2012; 206 (4): 300–308.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  13. Baschat AA . Arterial and venous Doppler in the diagnosis and management of early onset fetal growth restriction. Early Hum Dev 2005; 81 (11): 877–887.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  14. Mari G, Hanif F, Drennan K, Kruger M . Staging of intrauterine growth-restricted fetuses. J Ultrasound Med 2007; 26 (11): 1469–1477.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  15. Mari G, Hanif F . Fetal Doppler: umbilical artery, middle cerebral artery, and venous system. Semin Perinatol 2008; 32 (4): 253–257.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  16. Miller J, Turan S, Baschat AA . Fetal growth restriction. Semin Perinatol 2008; 32 (4): 274–280.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  17. Unterscheider J, Daly S, Geary MP, Kennelly MM, McAuliffe FM, O'Donoghue K et al. Predictable progressive Doppler deterioration in IUGR: does it really exist? Am J Obstet Gynecol 2013; 209 (6): 539.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  18. Mari G, Hanif F, Kruger M . Sequence of cardiovascular changes in IUGR in pregnancies with and without preeclampsia. Prenat Diagn 2008; 28 (5): 377–383.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  19. Acharya G, Wilsgaard T, Berntsen GK, Maltau JM, Kiserud T . Reference ranges for serial measurements of umbilical artery Doppler indices in the second half of pregnancy. Am J Obstet Gynecol 2005; 192: 937–944.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  20. 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 (9): 1223–1228.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  21. Baschat AA, Gembruch U . The cerebroplacental Doppler ratio revisited. Ultrasound Obstet Gynecol 2003; 21 (2): 124–127.

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  22. Bahado-Singh RO, Kovanci E, Jeffres A, Oz U, Deren O, Copel J et al. The Doppler cerebroplacental ratio and perinatal outcome in intrauterine growth restriction. Am J Obstet Gynecol. 1999; 180 (3 Pt 1): 750–756.

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  23. Baschat AA . Fetal growth restriction - from observation to intervention. J Perinat Med 2010; 38 (3): 239–246.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  24. Kutschera J, Tomaselli J, Urlesberger B, Maurer U, Häusler M, Gradnitzer E et al. Absent or reversed end-diastolic flow in the umbilical artery and abnormal Doppler cerebroplacental ratio—cognitive, neurological and somatic development at 3 to 6 years. Early Hum Dev 2002; 69 (1-2): 47–56.

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  25. 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): 209–212.

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  26. Murata S, Nakata M, Sumie M, Sugino N . The Doppler cerebroplacental ratio predicts non-reassuring fetal status in intrauterine growth restricted fetuses at term. J Obstet Gynaecol Res 2011; 37 (10): 1433–1437.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  27. 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): 333–337.

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  28. Harris P, Taylor R, Thielke R, Payne J, Gonzalez N, Conde J. et al. Research electronic data capture (REDCap): a metadata-driven methodology and workflow process for providing translational Research informatics support. J Biomed Inform 2009; 42: 377–381.

    Article  Google Scholar 

Download references

Acknowledgements

Study data were collected and managed with REDCap software (Research Electronic Data Capture), which is hosted at Cincinnati Children’s Hospital Medical Center under the Center for Clinical and Translational Science and Training grant support (UL1-RR026314-01 NCRR/NIH). REDCap is a secure, web-based application that was designed to support data capture for research studies to provide (1) an intuitive interface for validated data entry, (2) audit trails for tracking data manipulation and export procedures, (3) automated export procedures for seamless data downloads to common statistical packages and (4) procedures for importing data from external sources.28 This study was reviewed and approved by the University of Cincinnati Institutional Review Board, Protocol #12-07-05-03EE, approved 8/1/2013. This study received no external or internal funding support.

Author Contributions

The study was originally designed by Carri R Warshak. All authors, Carri R. Warshak, Jodi Regan and Heather Masters contributed to the IRB approval process, the data collection, statistical analysis and manuscript production.

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. Division of Maternal Fetal Medicine, Department of Obstetrics and Gynecology, University of Cincinnati College of Medicine, Cincinnati, OH, USA

    J Regan, H Masters & C R Warshak

Authors
  1. J Regan
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  2. H Masters
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  3. C R Warshak
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Corresponding author

Correspondence to C R Warshak.

Ethics declarations

Competing interests

The authors declare no conflict of interest.

Additional information

This work was presented at the Society for Maternal Fetal Medicine annual meeting in February, 2014 in New Orleans, LA, USA. February 3rd to 8th 2014 (Program ID 314). This work has not previously been submitted for publication.

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Check for updates. Verify currency and authenticity via CrossMark

Cite this article

Regan, J., Masters, H. & Warshak, C. Association between an abnormal cerebroplacental ratio and the development of severe pre-eclampsia. J Perinatol 35, 322–327 (2015). https://doi.org/10.1038/jp.2014.210

Download citation

  • Received:

  • Revised:

  • Accepted:

  • Published:

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1038/jp.2014.210

This article is cited by

Search

Advanced search

Quick links