Abstract
Objective
Abnormal umbilical cord coiling is associated with adverse perinatal outcomes; however, the etiology of the umbilical coiling pattern is poorly understood.
Study design
Retrospective cohort of all twin deliveries >20 weeks in 2014. Pregnancies were dichotomized by chorionicity and the umbilical coiling index (UCI) and placental cord insertion location were compared. In cases with one or both cords hypercoiled, the direction and pattern of coiling were compared by chorionicity. A similar analysis was performed stratified by zygosity.
Results
Three hundred sisty two twin pairs were included; 26 (7.2%) monochorionic and 174 (87.0%) definitively dizygotic. Concordance in the UCI and coiling category were similar between dichorionic and monochorionic as well as dizygous and monozygous gestations, (73.2% vs 80.8%, pā=ā0.399 and 71.4% vs 80.8%, pā=ā0.399, respectively). Analyses of the coiling direction and pattern also demonstrated no difference by chorionicity or zygosity.
Conclusion
These data do not support a genetic basis for umbilical cord coiling.
This is a preview of subscription content, access via your institution
Access options
Subscribe to this journal
Receive 12 print issues and online access
$259.00 per year
only $21.58 per issue
Buy this article
- Purchase on SpringerLink
- Instant access to full article PDF
Prices may be subject to local taxes which are calculated during checkout
Similar content being viewed by others
References
Chaurasia B, Agarwal B. Helical structure of the human umbilical cord. Acta Anat. 1979;103:226ā30.
Chitra T, Sushanth YS, Raghavan S. Umbilical coiling index as a marker of perinatal outcome: an analytical study. Obstet Gynecol Int. 2012;2012:213689.
Herman A, Zabow P, Segal M, Ron-el R, Bukovsky Y, Caspi E. Extremely large number of twists of the umbilical cord causing torsion and intrauterine fetal death. Int J Gynecol Obstet. 1991;35:165ā7.
Rana J, Ebert GA, Kappy KA. Adverse perinatal outcome in patients with an abnormal umbilical coiling index. Obstet Gynecol. 1995;85:573ā7.
Ezimokhai M, Rizk D, Thomas R. Maternal risk factors for abnormal vascular coiling of the umbilical cord. Am J Perinatol. 2000;17:441ā5.
Machin GA, Ackerman J, Gilbert-Barness E. Abnormal umbilical cord coiling is associated with adverse perinatal outcomes. Pediatr Devel Pathol. 2000;3:462ā71.
Strong T, Elliott J, Radin T. Non-coiled umbilical blood vessels: a new marker for the fetus at risk. Obstet Gynecol. 1993;81:409ā11.
Kashanian M, Akbarian A, Kouhpayehzadeh J. The umbilical coiling index and adverse perinatal outcome. Int J Gynecol Obstet. 2006;95:8ā13.
De Laat MW, Franx A, Nikkels PG, Visser GH. Prenatal ultrasonographic prediction of the umbilical coiling index at birth and adverse pregnancy outcome. Ultrasound Obstet Gynecol. 2006;28:704ā9.
de Laat MW, Franx A, Bots ML, Visser GH, Nikkels PG. Umbilical coiling index in normal and complicated pregnancies. Obstet Gynecol. 2006;107:1049ā55.
Patil NS, Kulkarni SR, Lohitashwa R. Umbilical cord coiling index and perinatal outcome. J Clin Diagn Res. 2013;7:1675ā7.
Jessop FA, Lees CC, Pathak S, Hook CE, Sebire NJ. Umbilical cord coiling: clinical outcomes in an unselected population and systematic review. Virchows Arch. 2014;464:105ā12.
Dutman AC, Nikkels PG. Umbilical hypercoiling in 2nd- and 3rd-trimester intrauterine fetal death. Pediatr Dev Pathol. 2015;18:10ā6.
Mittal A, Nanda S, Sen J. Antenatal umbilical coiling index as a predictor of perinatal outcome. Arch Gynecol Obstet. 2015;291:763ā8.
Lacro R, Jones K, Benirschke K. The umbilical cord twist: origin, direction, and relevance. Am J Obstet Gynecol. 1987;157:833ā8.
Degani S, Lewinsky R, Aharoni A, Gonen R, Ohel G. Differences between twin umbilical coiling indices correlate to differences in twin weight and doppler indices. J Matern Fetal Investig. 1998;8:130ā3.
Cromi A, Ghezzi F, Durig P, Di Naro E, Raio L. Sonographic umbilical cord morphometry and coiling patterns in twin-twin transfusion syndrome. Prenat Diagn. 2005;25:851ā5.
Beggan C, Mooney E, Downey P, Carroll S, Reardon W. A case of recurrent familial male miscarriages with hypercoiled umbilical cord: a possible X-linked association? Clin Dysmorphol. 2014;23:26ā8.
Hoffman JD, Kleeman L, Kennelly K, Honey E, Reardon W. Three new families with recurrent male miscarriages and hypercoiled umbilical cord. Clin Dysmorphol. 2015;24:128ā31.
Strong T, Jarles D, Vega J, Feldman D. The umbilical coiling index. Am J ofObstet Gynecol. 1994;170:29ā32.
Ernst LM, Minturn L, Huang MH, Curry E, Su EJ. Gross patterns of umbilical cord coiling: correlations with placental histology and stillbirth. Placenta. 2013;34:583ā8.
Moessinger AC. Fetal akinesia deformation sequence: an animal model. Pediatrics. 1983;72:857ā63.
Miller M, Higginbottom MH, Smith DW. Short umbilical cord: its origin and relevance. Pediatrics. 1981;67:618ā21.
Soernes S, Bakke T. The length of the human umbilical cord in twin pregnancies. Am J Obstet Gynecol. 1987;157:1229ā30.
Ochshorn Y, Bibi G, Ascher-Landsberg J, Kupferminc MJ, Lessing JB, Many A. Coiling characteristics of umbilical cords in breech vs. vertex presentation. J Perinat Med. 2009;37:525ā8.
Soernes S, Bakke T. The length of the human umbilical cord in vertex and breech presentations. Am J Obstet Gynecol. 1986;154:1086ā7.
Cambiaso O, Zhao DP, Abasolo JI, Aiello HA, Oepkes D, Lopriore E, et al. Discordance of cord insertions as a predictor of discordant fetal growth in monochorionic twins. Placenta. 2016;47:81ā5.
De Paepe ME, Shapiro S, Hanley LC, Chu S, Luks FI. Correlation between cord insertion type and superficial choriovasculature in diamniotic-monochorionic twin placentas. Placenta. 2011;32:901ā5.
Acknowledgements
Funding
The authors report no source of financial support.
Author information
Authors and Affiliations
Corresponding author
Ethics declarations
Conflict of interest
The authors declare that they have no conflict of interest.
Rights and permissions
About this article
Cite this article
Ayala, N.K., Ernst, L.M. & Miller, E.S. Is umbilical coiling genetically determined?. J Perinatol 38, 653ā657 (2018). https://doi.org/10.1038/s41372-018-0078-y
Received:
Revised:
Accepted:
Published:
Issue Date:
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1038/s41372-018-0078-y