ﺑﺎﺯﮔﺸﺖ ﺑﻪ ﺻﻔﺤﻪ ﻗﺒﻠﯽ
خرید پکیج
تعداد آیتم قابل مشاهده باقیمانده : 3 مورد
نسخه الکترونیک
medimedia.ir

Fetal growth restriction: Pregnancy management and outcome

Fetal growth restriction: Pregnancy management and outcome
Literature review current through: Jan 2024.
This topic last updated: Apr 25, 2023.

INTRODUCTION — Identification of fetal growth restriction (FGR) is an integral component of prenatal care as it is a leading cause of perinatal morbidity and mortality [1]. When sonographic criteria for diagnosis of FGR are met (table 1), the obstetric provider needs to assess the severity, determine the probable cause, counsel the parents, closely monitor fetal growth and well-being for the remainder of the pregnancy, and determine the optimal time for and route of birth. Management is complicated because FGR is not a homogeneous entity and the cause cannot always be determined prenatally. Regardless of the cause, birth timing needs to balance the consequences of iatrogenic preterm birth with the risk of stillbirth in ongoing monitored pregnancies.

This topic will discuss pregnancy management and outcome of FGR in singleton pregnancies. Screening and diagnosis of FGR and evaluation to determine the probable cause are reviewed separately. (See "Fetal growth restriction: Screening and diagnosis" and "Fetal growth restriction: Evaluation".)

FGR in twin pregnancies is also reviewed separately. (See "Twin pregnancy: Routine prenatal care", section on 'Screening for fetal growth restriction and discordance' and "Selective fetal growth restriction in monochorionic twin pregnancies".)

PRENATAL CARE

Goal — The focus of prenatal care in pregnancies with FGR is to identify those fetuses who are at highest risk of perinatal demise and thus may benefit from early delivery. Distinguishing the constitutionally small fetus from the fetus with pathologic growth can help avoid unnecessary interventions for the former and lead to appropriate monitoring and delivery timing of the latter. Unfortunately, this distinction is not always possible.

Fetal surveillance — The key parameters for fetal surveillance are:

Estimated fetal weight (EFW)

Doppler ultrasonography

Fetal behavior (biophysical profile [BPP] and nonstress test [NST]/cardiotocography [CTG])

Fetal surveillance in FGR is initiated at the gestational age when delivery for perinatal benefit would be considered [2,3]. Patients should receive comprehensive counseling on neonatal morbidity and mortality by a team including the primary obstetric provider, maternal-fetal medicine, and neonatology services before fetal surveillance is initiated, especially when delivery for nonreassuring findings would result in an extremely preterm neonate.

The cardiovascular (Doppler) and behavioral (BPP and NST) manifestations of fetal deterioration in FGR can occur largely independent of each other. For example, an abnormal BPP can occur before the appearance of the late Doppler changes (eg, reversed umbilical artery [UA] Doppler flow, ductus venosus [DV] a-wave abnormalities) [4]. This is the reason for monitoring the fetus with multiple modalities. Observational data suggest that adoption of a protocol to detect and monitor FGR can reduce stillbirth [5].

Fetal weight — Sonography is performed every two to four weeks to assess the change in EFW over time [2,3]. It is not performed more frequently than every two weeks because the inherent error associated with ultrasonographic measurements can preclude an accurate assessment of interval growth [3]. Continued fetal growth is reassuring, while a fall in the EFW percentile for gestational age is associated with increased perinatal morbidity and mortality (figure 1) [6,7].

Doppler ultrasonography, nonstress test/cardiotocography, and biophysical profile — The type and frequency of Doppler ultrasound for fetal surveillance to predict adverse neonatal outcome in FGR are not standardized. For example, the Society for Maternal-Fetal Medicine (SMFM), American College of Obstetricians and Gynecologists (ACOG), and American Institute of Ultrasound in Medicine (AIUM) suggest not using Doppler assessment of the DV, middle cerebral artery (MCA), or UA for routine clinical management of FGR [2], whereas the International Society of Ultrasound in Obstetrics and Gynecology (ISUOG) supports their use [8].

Surveillance strategies that incorporate Doppler velocimetry to determine the frequency of fetal behavioral testing (NST/CTG, BPP) are associated with better neonatal outcomes and lower stillbirth rates compared with empirically determined surveillance strategies (stillbirth: 0 to 4 percent versus 8 to 11 percent [9]). The author of this topic monitors UA Doppler in both early- and late-onset FGR (ie, onset <32 versus ≥32 weeks of gestation). In outpatients with late-onset FGR, he also monitors MCA Doppler if the UA Doppler is normal because it may become abnormal before the UA Doppler and this would be an indication to increase the frequency of fetal surveillance. In inpatients, he uses MCA Doppler results as an additional factor to consider during counseling and shared decision-making, but not for delivery timing. Experts do not consistently recommend MCA Doppler in fetal surveillance of FGR because of its low predictive value for adverse perinatal outcome [10].

The author's protocol is:

If the UA and MCA Doppler (if performed because of late-onset FGR) are normal (UA pulsatility index [PI] ≤95th and MCA PI ≥5th percentile), then UA and MCA Doppler and a BPP are performed at weekly intervals.

If either the UA or MCA Doppler (if performed because of late-onset FGR) is abnormal but the UA has diastolic flow (UA PI >95th and MCA PI <5th percentile), amniotic fluid volume is normal, and no concerning maternal or fetal comorbidities exist, then UA and MCA Doppler are performed twice a week and a BPP is also performed at one of the visits and an NST is performed at the other visit.

Patients with abnormal UA or MCA Doppler but UA diastolic flow and concerning comorbidities (eg, oligohydramnios, preeclampsia, chronic hypertension) are admitted to the hospital. Following 24-hour inpatient observation and fetal monitoring, care is individualized (inpatient versus outpatient monitoring versus delivery).

If the UA Doppler has absent or reversed diastolic flow, then the patient is admitted for convenient access to frequent fetal surveillance and to enable prompt fetal evaluation in the event of decreased fetal activity or other pregnancy complications. NSTs are performed every 6 to 12 hours, a BPP is performed daily, and UA and MCA Doppler are performed two to three times per week.

These fetuses are also monitored with DV Doppler. Absent or reversed DV a-wave in this setting represents an advanced stage of fetal compromise and can be an additional factor to consider during counseling and shared decision-making [4,11-14]; however, this finding alone is not an indication for delivery [15,16]. (See 'Delivery' below.)

Antenatal corticosteroids — Ideally, a course of antenatal betamethasone (or dexamethasone) is given to pregnancies <34+0 weeks of gestation in the seven days before preterm birth is anticipated. The efficacy of antenatal steroids for reducing neonatal morbidity and mortality in the preterm growth-restricted neonate remains controversial, with two large studies showing conflicting results [17,18]. Until definitive information is available, a course of betamethasone (or dexamethasone) should be administered. The precise day of administration before 34 weeks is based on multiple factors, including the severity of FGR, Doppler findings, comorbid conditions, and rate of deterioration in fetal status. Administration between 34+0 and 36+6 weeks does not appear to decrease the need for respiratory support and increases the rate of neonatal hypoglycemia [19] but is recommended by some guidelines [3]. Administration of antenatal corticosteroids, including potential harms on neurodevelopment, are reviewed in detail separately. (See "Antenatal corticosteroid therapy for reduction of neonatal respiratory morbidity and mortality from preterm delivery".)

Three studies observed that growth-restricted fetuses with absent end-diastolic flow often show transient improvement in blood flow after betamethasone administration [20-22]. Fetuses that did not show increased flow appeared to have poorer neonatal outcomes. The reason sicker fetuses are unable to mount a vascular response to betamethasone administration is unclear. One action of glucocorticoids is to enhance the tropic effect of catecholamines on heart muscle. It is hypothesized that inotropy does not improve in sicker fetuses because they have impaired cardiac wall compliance.

Maternal interventions — There is no convincing evidence that any intervention in an otherwise healthy pregnant patient improves fetal growth and outcome in FGR. Information is available on the following interventions.

Nutritional deficiency – Patients with risk factors for or with evidence of nutritional deficiencies (eg, pregnancies complicated by bariatric surgery or eating disorders) may benefit from referral to a registered dietician.

Smoking cessation – In smokers, an intensive smoking cessation program may be of value in improving fetal growth and has other pregnancy and health benefits [23,24]. (See "Cigarette and tobacco products in pregnancy: Impact on pregnancy and the neonate".)

Statins – Use of a statin appears promising. A pilot trial in 38 patients with singleton pregnancies and FGR diagnosed at ≤28 weeks of gestation observed that administration of pravastatin 40 mg improved birth weight compared with no treatment (1300 versus 1040 grams), although the difference was not statistically significant [25]. The pravastatin group had significant improvement in angiogenic profiles but not in Doppler parameters.

Antihypertensive therapy – In pregnant patients with chronic hypertension, antihypertensive therapy has maternal benefits but neither increases nor clearly decreases the risk of FGR [26].

Phosphodiesterase-5 enzyme inhibitors – Use of a phosphodiesterase-5 enzyme inhibitor (eg, tadalafil, sildenafil) appeared promising and was under investigation [27]. However, a multicenter Dutch trial of sildenafil for treatment of poor prognosis early-onset growth restriction was halted early because of a higher than expected rate of pulmonary hypertension in the intervention group with no benefit in the primary outcome (perinatal mortality or major neonatal morbidity) at the time the trial was stopped [28]. A concurrent trial in Australia and New Zealand reported sildenafil had no effect on fetal growth velocity after diagnosis of growth restriction before 30 weeks but no adverse effects on newborns [29]. In a meta-analysis of phosphodiesterase-5 inhibitors in FGR (six trials using sildenafil, one using tadalafil), the intervention improved uteroplacental, but not fetal cerebral, blood perfusion [30].

Other – Numerous other approaches have been tried, including maternal nutritional supplementation (eg, balanced protein energy bars, L-arginine, lipid-based nutrients), oxygen therapy, and interventions to improve blood flow to the placenta (eg, plasma volume expansion, nitroglycerin, bed rest, low-dose aspirin, anticoagulation), but the quality of evidence is low and none has been proven effective [31-40].

DELIVERY

General approach to timing — There is little consensus about the optimal time to deliver the growth-restricted fetus. The timing and route of delivery of pregnancies with FGR is based on a combination of factors, including umbilical artery (UA) Doppler findings, biophysical profile (BPP) score, nonstress test (NST)/cardiotocography (CTG) result, gestational age, and fetal weight.

Early severe FGR is a major challenge because morbidity and mortality related to preterm birth are relatively high before 32 weeks [41,42], and between 26 and 29 weeks of gestation each day in utero was estimated to improve survival by 1 to 2 percent in one study [43], and by 50 percent per week in a second study [44]. Although minimum thresholds of 26 weeks of gestation, 500 g, or both have been suggested for delivery for fetal indications, ongoing advances in neonatal care have enabled survival of younger and smaller neonates. Decision-making in these cases is complex and should include coordination of care between maternal-fetal medicine and neonatology services, along with comprehensive patient counseling on neonatal morbidity and mortality and shared decision-making regarding pregnancy management [2].

The use of 37+0 weeks as the upper threshold for delivery of the least complicated FGR pregnancies is based on very limited data and expert opinion [45]. The increased risk associated with advancing gestational age is supported by a study of over 57,000 pregnancies with estimated fetal weight (EFW) <10th percentile in which the risk of stillbirth in the 37th week was 28 in 10,000 and the cumulative risk increased with each advancing week of gestation (38th week: 41 in 10,000, 39th week: 77 in 10,000, 40th week: 194 in 10,000) [46]. This study did not consider the impact of associated factors (eg, amniotic fluid volume, Doppler findings).

The use of 30 to 34 weeks as the upper threshold for delivery of the most complicated FGR pregnancies is also based on limited data suggesting that when the UA has absent diastolic flow, the risk of fetal death exceeds neonatal morbidity and mortality rates in pregnancies that are at least 33 to 34 weeks of gestation, and when the UA has reversed diastolic flow, the risk of fetal death exceeds neonatal morbidity and mortality rates in pregnancies that are at least 30 weeks [47].

Delivery should not be delayed beyond 39+0 weeks of gestation because the risk of fetal demise significantly increases at term, particularly as the severity of FGR increases, without clinically significant neonatal benefit from further maturation in utero. As an example, in a retrospective cohort study, the risk of fetal death at 39 weeks was estimated as 32 per 10,000 ongoing pregnancies for fetal weight <3rd percentile, 23 per 10,000 ongoing pregnancies for fetal weight <5th percentile, 13 per 10,000 ongoing pregnancies for fetal weight <10th percentile, and 2 per 10,000 ongoing pregnancies for fetal weight ≥10th percentile [48].

The following approach is consistent with major guidelines and is commonly used in the United States. However, it is important to emphasize that the BPP is not universally used and any fetal testing should be interpreted in the specific clinical context [2,3,9,45].

Patients with a reactive NST and BPP score 8/8, 10/10 or 8/10 with normal amniotic fluid volume:

UA reversed diastolic flow Deliver between 30+0 and 32+0 weeks of gestation or at diagnosis if diagnosed at >32+0 weeks.

UA absent diastolic flow – Deliver between 33+0 and 34+0 weeks of gestation or at diagnosis if diagnosed at >34+0 weeks.

UA pulsatility index (PI) abnormal (PI >95th percentile) – Deliver at 37+0 weeks or at diagnosis if diagnosed at >37+0 weeks.

UA PI normal (PI ≤95th percentile):

-EFW <3rd percentile and no comorbidities – Deliver at 37+0 weeks or at diagnosis if diagnosed at >37+0 weeks.

-EFW ≥3rd and <10th percentile and no comorbidities – Deliver between 38+0 and 39+0 weeks of gestation or at diagnosis if diagnosed at >39+0 weeks.

-FGR with oligohydramnios or comorbidities (eg, preeclampsia, chronic hypertension) – Timing should be individualized, but most patients should be delivered between 34+0 and 37+6 weeks of gestation.

Patients with nonreassuring fetal testing – Management depends on the specific findings and gestational age. In all cases in which delivery for nonreassuring fetal testing is generally indicated but would result in the birth of an extremely preterm neonate, patients should receive comprehensive counseling on neonatal morbidity and mortality by a team including the primary obstetric provider, maternal-fetal medicine, and neonatology services as part of shared decision-making about delivery timing, route of delivery, and neonatal resuscitation.

Repetitive late decelerations – Prompt delivery is indicated.

BPP score (BPP includes NST):

-0 or 2/10: This is a very abnormal score with a high risk of fetal death without intervention (perinatal mortality within one week: 600 and 125 in 1000, respectively [9]). These pregnancies should be delivered.

-4/10: This is an abnormal score (perinatal mortality within one week: 91 in 1000 [9]). The BPP generally should be repeated in one hour. If still 4/10, then delivery is often indicated.

-6/10 with oligohydramnios (mean vertical pocket <2 cm): This is also an abnormal score (perinatal mortality within one week: 89 in 1000 [9]). The test should be repeated within 24 hours. The decision to deliver is often individualized based on the results of additional testing (eg, repeat BPP, NST), maternal status, gestational age, and severity of Doppler findings (UA, DV).

-6/10 without oligohydramnios or 8/10 with oligohydramnios (mean vertical pocket <2 cm): These are equivocal scores (perinatal mortality within one week: variable and 89 in 1000, respectively [9]). The decision to deliver is individualized based on the results of additional testing (eg, NST, repeated BPP), maternal status, gestational age, and severity of Doppler findings (UA, DV).

Evidence from major trials — The following key randomized trials attempted to answer the question of when to intervene in FGR pregnancies, without a clear conclusion:

The Growth Restriction Intervention Trial (GRIT) randomly assigned pregnant patients between 24 and 36 weeks with FGR to immediate (n = 273) or delayed (n = 274) delivery if the obstetrician was uncertain about when to intervene [49]. In the delayed delivery group, delivery occurred when the obstetrician was no longer uncertain about intervening, which occurred at a median of 4.9 days from enrollment.

The immediate delivery group had fewer stillbirths (2 versus 9 with delayed delivery) but more neonatal and infant deaths (27 versus 18). Follow-up data up to age 13 years showed no differences between groups in cognition, language, motor, or parent-assessed behavior scores on standardized tests [50,51].

These data suggest that delaying delivery of the very preterm growth-restricted fetus in the setting of uncertainty results in some stillbirths, but immediate delivery produces an almost equal number of neonatal deaths, and neither approach results in better long-term neurodevelopmental outcome.

The Disproportionate Intrauterine Growth Intervention Trial At Term trial (DIGITAT) randomly assigned 650 pregnant patients over 36 weeks of gestation with suspected FGR to induction of labor or expectant monitoring [52-54]. The primary outcome was a composite measure of adverse neonatal outcome (death before hospital discharge, five-minute Apgar score <7, UA pH <7.05, or admission to the intensive care unit) [52]. Neonatal morbidity was analyzed separately using Morbidity Assessment Index for Newborns (MAIN) score [53].

The induction group delivered 10 days earlier and weighed 130 grams less (mean difference -130 grams, 95% CI -188 to -71) than the expectantly managed group, but had statistically similar composite adverse outcome (6.1 versus 5.3 percent with expectant management) and cesarean birth rates (approximately 14 percent) [52]. Developmental and behavioral outcomes at two years of age were also similar for both groups [54]. The authors concluded that both approaches were reasonable, and the choice should depend on patient preference. However, in a subanalysis of data, they reported that neonatal intensive care unit admissions were lower when growth restricted fetuses were delivered after 38 weeks of gestation [53], which suggests a benefit of deferring delivery until 38 weeks of gestation, as long as the fetus is closely monitored and in the absence of other indications for an early delivery.

The Trial of Randomized Umbilical and Fetal Flow in Europe (TRUFFLE) assessed whether changes in the fetal DV Doppler waveform could be used to guide timing of delivery of FGR instead of CTG short-term variation (STV) [55]. The primary outcome measure was survival without neurodevelopmental impairment at two years of age. Pregnancies were randomly assigned to one of three monitoring approaches: CTG with delivery for reduced STV, DV monitoring with delivery for early DV changes (PI >95th percentile), or DV monitoring with delivery for late DV changes (a-wave indicating absent or reversed flow). The proportion of infants surviving without neurodevelopmental impairment was 77 to 85 percent, with no significant differences among the three groups. Delaying delivery until the development of late DV changes resulted in an improvement in survival without neurodevelopmental impairment (95 percent versus 91 percent for survivors in the early DV changes group and 85 percent for survivors in the reduced STV group); however, this came at the cost of a small increase in unexpected fetal demise (0 of 166 in the STV group versus 3 of 167 in the early ductal changes group versus 4 of 170 in the late ductal changes group). There were no differences in immediate neonatal composite morbidity or mortality.

In a post hoc analysis of their data, the TRUFFLE group concluded both DV and computerized CTG evaluations are warranted since the majority of infants in the DV groups were delivered for reduced STV or spontaneous decelerations in fetal heart rate rather than early or late changes in the DV [56]. The International Society of Ultrasound in Obstetrics and Gynecology (ISUOG) practice guidelines on FGR support delivery following 26 weeks of gestation in the presence of DV a-wave at or below baseline [8]. They also recommend delivery between 26+0 and 28+6 weeks in the presence of STV <2.6ms, and between 29+0 and 31+6 weeks in the presence of STV <3.0ms.

Caution is urged when extrapolating the above findings to practice in the United States [2] as computerized CTG is not commonly utilized in the United States.

Route — Cesarean birth is performed for standard obstetric indications; otherwise a trial of labor is acceptable. An unfavorable cervix is not a reason to avoid induction [57]. However, when the indication for delivery is reversed flow of the UA, patients are given the option of a scheduled cesarean birth, especially when the cervix is unfavorable, because many of these fetuses will not tolerate labor and it is prudent to avoid adding an acute insult on a chronically hypoxic fetus.

We prefer a mechanical ripening method (insertion of a balloon catheter or hygroscopic dilator), which may be safer than prostaglandins in this setting [58]. If the Bishop score is >6, we administer oxytocin without mechanical ripening.

In a meta-analysis of observational studies of labor induction with misoprostol, dinoprostone, or mechanical methods in FGR, mechanical methods appeared to be associated with a lower occurrence of adverse intrapartum outcomes, but a direct comparison among methods could not be performed [59].

In a secondary analysis of data from the DIGITAT and HYPITAT trials (pregnancies complicated by FGR and hypertension), induction of labor at term in patients with median Bishop scores of 3 (range 1 to 6) was not associated with a higher rate of cesarean birth than expectant management, and approximately 85 percent of patients in both groups achieved a vaginal birth [60]. Prostaglandins or a balloon catheter was used for cervical ripening.

Intrapartum management

Magnesium sulfate for neuroprotection – Magnesium sulfate is administered for neuroprotection in pregnancies <32 weeks. When studied specifically in pregnancies with growth-restricted fetuses, a decrease in significant neurodevelopmental impairment and death was observed [61]. Dosing and evidence of efficacy are reviewed separately. (See "Neuroprotective effects of in utero exposure to magnesium sulfate".)

Intrapartum fetal monitoring – Continuous fetal heart rate monitoring is indicated, given the increased potential for fetal hypoxemia during labor.

OUTCOME/PROGNOSIS — The outcome/prognosis of FGR newborns with congenital or genetic abnormalities or congenital infection depends on the specific abnormality. (See separate topic reviews on specific disorders).

The outcome/prognosis in other cases is discussed below.

Pediatric

Short-term morbidity and mortality – Fetal demise, neonatal death, and neonatal morbidity are more common in FGR than in neonates with birth weights that are appropriate for gestational age [62]. The prognosis worsens with early-onset FGR, increasing severity of FGR (figure 1), and absent or reversed end-diastolic flow on umbilical artery (UA) Doppler [63]. In a systematic review of studies of FGR diagnosed before 32 weeks of gestation (2895 pregnancies delivered after 2000), the frequencies of fetal and neonatal death were 12 and 8 percent, respectively [64]. The most common neonatal morbidities were respiratory distress syndrome (34 percent), retinopathy of prematurity (13 percent), and sepsis (30 percent). The quality of evidence was generally rated as very low to moderate, except for three large, well-designed, randomized trials. Newborn complications are reviewed in depth separately. (See "Infants with fetal (intrauterine) growth restriction".)

Long-term morbidity – FGR may predispose to hypertension, type-2 diabetes mellitus, coronary heart disease, and chronic kidney disease in adulthood, which has been attributed to partial resetting of fetal metabolic homeostasis and endocrine systems in response to in utero nutritional deprivation. (See "Infants with fetal (intrauterine) growth restriction", section on 'Adult chronic disorders'.)

The combination of preterm birth and severe FGR increases the risk for long-term neurodevelopmental abnormalities and impaired cognitive performance. In the systematic review of studies of FGR diagnosed before 32 weeks of gestation, 476 children underwent neurodevelopmental assessment and 12 percent were diagnosed with cognitive impairment and/or cerebral palsy [64]. These findings should be interpreted cautiously given the small proportion of children with follow-up and differences in patient and pregnancy characteristics among the studies.

Maternal

Risk for cardiovascular disease — It has been hypothesized that FGR may be a marker for prepregnancy subclinical maternal cardiovascular impairment. This would explain why the birth of a newborn with FGR unrelated to anatomic or genetic abnormalities appears to be predictive of an increased long-term maternal risk for cardiovascular disease (coronary artery disease, myocardial infarction, coronary revascularization, peripheral arterial disease, transient ischemic attack, stroke). A systematic review of 10 cohort studies found a weak but consistent trend of an increased risk of cardiovascular disease-related morbidity and mortality in patients with a history of birth of a small for gestational age (SGA) newborn compared with those with no such history (odds ratios ranged from 1.09 to 3.50) [65]. Pooling was not performed because of variations in the exposure definition among studies.

Whether risk-reduction interventions should be recommended because of a history of FGR is unclear, but healthy lifestyle changes in patients with traditional risk factors for cardiovascular disease (eg, smoking, overweight and obesity, unhealthy diet, physical inactivity) are beneficial. (See "Overview of primary prevention of cardiovascular disease".)

Future pregnancies

Recurrence risk — There is a tendency to repeat SGA births in successive pregnancies [66,67]. As an example, a prospective national cohort study from the Netherlands reported that the risk of a nonanomalous SGA birth (<5th percentile) in the second pregnancy of patients whose first birth was SGA versus not SGA was 23 and 3 percent, respectively [66]. The odds of recurrence increase markedly as the number of previous SGA births increases [68].

Furthermore, uteroplacental insufficiency may manifest in different ways in different pregnancies. Growth restriction, preterm birth, preeclampsia, abruption, and stillbirth can all be sequelae of impaired placental function. The association between an SGA birth in a first pregnancy and stillbirth in a subsequent pregnancy was illustrated by analysis of data from the Swedish Birth Register (table 2) [69]; subsequent studies from the United States and Australia reported similar findings [70,71]. The highest risk of stillbirth was in patients with a preterm SGA birth.

Risk reduction in subsequent pregnancies

General principles – In subsequent pregnancies, any potentially treatable causes of suboptimal fetal growth should be addressed (eg, cessation of smoking and alcohol intake, chemoprophylaxis and mosquito avoidance in areas where malaria is prevalent, balanced energy/protein supplementation in patients with significant nutritional deficiencies). (Refer to individual topic reviews).

Avoiding a short interpregnancy interval may also be beneficial as intervals less than 6 to 12 months have been associated with an increased risk of SGA birth [72].

Dietary changes and use of supplements have been evaluated, but the studies generally showed no benefit or had serious design limitations [73-77].

Selective role for low-dose aspirin – Low-dose aspirin may be effective when FGR is secondary to preeclampsia since aspirin appears to reduce the risk of developing preeclampsia in patients at moderate to high risk of developing the disorder. In a meta-analysis of 45 randomized trials of low-dose aspirin for prevention of preeclampsia and FGR in patients at high risk, aspirin prophylaxis markedly reduced the incidence of FGR (relative risk [RR] 0.56, 95% CI 0.44-0.70) compared with placebo/no treatment [78]. Low-dose aspirin is not recommended in the absence of risk factors for preeclampsia [79]. These data are reviewed in more detail separately. (See "Preeclampsia: Prevention", section on 'Low-dose aspirin'.)

The combination of low-dose aspirin and low-molecular-weight heparin (LMWH) was not more effective than aspirin alone in a randomized trial [80].

No role for anticoagulation – Anticoagulation with unfractionated heparin or LMWH does not reduce the risk of recurrent placenta-mediated late-pregnancy complications, such as growth restriction. In a meta-analysis using individual patient data from randomized trials of LMWH therapy versus no LMWH for patients with any prior placenta-mediated pregnancy complications, the intervention did not significantly reduce the incidence of the primary composite outcome (early-onset or severe preeclampsia, SGA <5th percentile, abruption, pregnancy loss ≥20 weeks of gestation: 62 of 444 [14 percent] versus 95 of 443 [22 percent], RR 0.64, 95% CI 0.36-1.11) [81]. These data support avoiding anticoagulation in patients with previous placenta-mediated disease, given the lack of clear benefit and potential risks of anticoagulation, cost, and inconvenience.

Selected patients with obstetric antiphospholipid syndrome are an exception. Management of these patients is discussed elsewhere. (See "Antiphospholipid syndrome: Obstetric implications and management in pregnancy".)

Management of subsequent pregnancies — Accurate dating by early ultrasonography is important to establish gestational age, with subsequent intermittent ultrasound examinations to monitor fetal growth. A committee opinion from the American College of Obstetricians and Gynecologists (ACOG) suggests antenatal fetal surveillance in pregnancies after a previous FGR that required a preterm birth [82], based on data that these pregnancies (even if the fetus is an appropriate size for dates) are at increased risk of stillbirth and the risk is inversely related to the gestational age at the first SGA birth [69,71,83].

SOCIETY GUIDELINE LINKS — Links to society and government-sponsored guidelines from selected countries and regions around the world are provided separately. (See "Society guideline links: Fetal growth restriction".)

SUMMARY AND RECOMMENDATIONS

Fetal surveillance – The focus of fetal surveillance in pregnancies with fetal growth restriction (FGR) is to identify those fetuses who are at highest risk of perinatal demise and thus may benefit from early delivery. Antenatal surveillance should begin at a gestational age when delivery would be considered for perinatal benefit. The key fetal evaluations are:

Growth – Serial estimation of estimated fetal weight (EFW) is performed at two- to four-week intervals. (See 'Fetal weight' above.)

Monitoring – The general approach to Doppler and fetal behavioral monitoring is shown in the algorithm (algorithm 1).

-Doppler – The author monitors umbilical artery (UA) Doppler in both early- and late-onset FGR (ie, onset <32 versus ≥32 weeks of gestation). In outpatients with late-onset FGR with normal UA Doppler, he also monitors middle cerebral artery (MCA) Doppler as it may become abnormal before the UA and would be an indication to increase the frequency of fetal surveillance. Not all centers use MCA Doppler in fetal surveillance of FGR because of its low predictive value for adverse perinatal outcome. The frequency of testing depends on the findings. (See 'Doppler ultrasonography, nonstress test/cardiotocography, and biophysical profile' above.)

-Fetal behavior (nonstress test [NST]/cardiotocography [CTG] and biophysical profile [BPP]) – NST/CTG/BPP frequency is based on Doppler results and presence of oligohydramnios or other comorbidities. (See 'Doppler ultrasonography, nonstress test/cardiotocography, and biophysical profile' above.)

Timing of delivery The timing of delivery is based on a combination of factors, including UA Doppler findings, BPP score, NST/CTG result, gestational age, and fetal weight. A course of antenatal betamethasone (or dexamethasone) is administered to pregnancies <34+0 weeks of gestation in the seven days before preterm birth is anticipated. (See 'General approach to timing' above and 'Antenatal corticosteroids' above.)

Delivery route – Cesarean birth is performed for standard obstetric indications. If a trial of labor is planned, an unfavorable cervix is not a reason to avoid induction. However, when the indication for delivery is reversed flow of the UA, we give patients the option of a scheduled cesarean birth, especially when the cervix is unfavorable, because many of these fetuses will not tolerate labor and we wish to avoid adding more stress on a chronic hypoxic fetus. (See 'Route' above.)

Pediatric outcome/prognosis – The outcome/prognosis of newborns with anatomic or genetic abnormalities or congenital infection depends on the specific abnormality and are discussed elsewhere. (See separate topic reviews on specific disorders).

Fetal demise, neonatal death, and neonatal morbidity are more common in FGR than in neonates with birth weights that are appropriate for gestational age. The prognosis worsens with early-onset FGR, increasing severity of growth restriction (figure 1), and absent or reversed end-diastolic flow on UA Doppler. Long-term risks include growth abnormalities, impaired neurodevelopment, and increased risk for hypertension, type-2 diabetes mellitus, coronary heart disease, and chronic kidney disease in adulthood. (See 'Pediatric' above.)

Maternal outcome/prognosis

There is a tendency to repeat small for gestational age (SGA) births in successive pregnancies. Furthermore, uteroplacental insufficiency may manifest in different ways in different pregnancies. Growth restriction, preterm birth, preeclampsia, abruption, and stillbirth can all be sequelae of impaired placental function (table 2). (See 'Future pregnancies' above.).

Low-dose aspirin may be effective when FGR is secondary to preeclampsia (see "Preeclampsia: Prevention", section on 'Low-dose aspirin'). Anticoagulation with unfractionated heparin or low-molecular-weight heparin (LMWH) does not reduce the risk of recurrent placenta-mediated late-pregnancy complications, such as growth restriction. (See 'Risk reduction in subsequent pregnancies' above.)

The birth of a newborn with FGR may be predictive of an increased long-term maternal risk for cardiovascular disease. Whether risk-reduction interventions should be recommended because of a history of FGR is unclear, but healthy lifestyle changes in patients with traditional risk factors for cardiovascular disease (eg, smoking, overweight and obesity, unhealthy diet, physical inactivity) are beneficial. (See 'Risk for cardiovascular disease' above and "Overview of primary prevention of cardiovascular disease".)

ACKNOWLEDGMENT — The UpToDate editorial staff acknowledges Robert Resnik, MD, who contributed to an earlier version of this topic review.

  1. Resnik R. Intrauterine growth restriction. Obstet Gynecol 2002; 99:490.
  2. Society for Maternal-Fetal Medicine (SMFM). Electronic address: [email protected], Martins JG, Biggio JR, Abuhamad A. Society for Maternal-Fetal Medicine Consult Series #52: Diagnosis and management of fetal growth restriction: (Replaces Clinical Guideline Number 3, April 2012). Am J Obstet Gynecol 2020; 223:B2.
  3. Fetal Growth Restriction: ACOG Practice Bulletin, Number 227. Obstet Gynecol 2021; 137:e16.
  4. Mari G, Hanif F, Kruger M. Sequence of cardiovascular changes in IUGR in pregnancies with and without preeclampsia. Prenat Diagn 2008; 28:377.
  5. Hugh O, Williams M, Turner S, Gardosi J. Reduction of stillbirths in England from 2008 to 2017 according to uptake of the Growth Assessment Protocol: 10-year population-based cohort study. Ultrasound Obstet Gynecol 2021; 57:401.
  6. Stampalija T, Wolf H, Mylrea-Foley B, et al. Reduced fetal growth velocity and weight loss are associated with adverse perinatal outcome in fetuses at risk of growth restriction. Am J Obstet Gynecol 2023; 228:71.e1.
  7. Manning FA. Intrauterine growth retardation. In: Fetal Medicine: Principles and Practice, Appleton & Lange, Norwalk, CT 1995. p.312.
  8. Lees CC, Stampalija T, Baschat A, et al. ISUOG Practice Guidelines: diagnosis and management of small-for-gestational-age fetus and fetal growth restriction. Ultrasound Obstet Gynecol 2020; 56:298.
  9. Baschat AA, Galan HL, Lee W, et al. The role of the fetal biophysical profile in the management of fetal growth restriction. Am J Obstet Gynecol 2022; 226:475.
  10. Morris RK, Say R, Robson SC, et al. Systematic review and meta-analysis of middle cerebral artery Doppler to predict perinatal wellbeing. Eur J Obstet Gynecol Reprod Biol 2012; 165:141.
  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; 18:571.
  12. Ferrazzi E, Bozzo M, Rigano S, et al. Temporal sequence of abnormal Doppler changes in the peripheral and central circulatory systems of the severely growth-restricted fetus. Ultrasound Obstet Gynecol 2002; 19:140.
  13. Hecher K, Bilardo CM, Stigter RH, et al. Monitoring of fetuses with intrauterine growth restriction: a longitudinal study. Ultrasound Obstet Gynecol 2001; 18:564.
  14. Cosmi E, Ambrosini G, D'Antona D, et al. Doppler, cardiotocography, and biophysical profile changes in growth-restricted fetuses. Obstet Gynecol 2005; 106:1240.
  15. Lalor JG, Fawole B, Alfirevic Z, Devane D. Biophysical profile for fetal assessment in high risk pregnancies. Cochrane Database Syst Rev 2008; :CD000038.
  16. Kaur S, Picconi JL, Chadha R, et al. Biophysical profile in the treatment of intrauterine growth-restricted fetuses who weigh <1000 g. Am J Obstet Gynecol 2008; 199:264.e1.
  17. Elimian A, Verma U, Canterino J, et al. Effectiveness of antenatal steroids in obstetric subgroups. Obstet Gynecol 1999; 93:174.
  18. Schaap AH, Wolf H, Bruinse HW, et al. Effects of antenatal corticosteroid administration on mortality and long-term morbidity in early preterm, growth-restricted infants. Obstet Gynecol 2001; 97:954.
  19. Bitar G, Merrill SJ, Sciscione AC, Hoffman MK. Antenatal corticosteroids in the late preterm period for growth-restricted pregnancies. Am J Obstet Gynecol MFM 2020; 2:100153.
  20. Robertson MC, Murila F, Tong S, et al. Predicting perinatal outcome through changes in umbilical artery Doppler studies after antenatal corticosteroids in the growth-restricted fetus. Obstet Gynecol 2009; 113:636.
  21. Simchen MJ, Alkazaleh F, Adamson SL, et al. The fetal cardiovascular response to antenatal steroids in severe early-onset intrauterine growth restriction. Am J Obstet Gynecol 2004; 190:296.
  22. Nozaki AM, Francisco RP, Fonseca ES, et al. Fetal hemodynamic changes following maternal betamethasone administration in pregnancies with fetal growth restriction and absent end-diastolic flow in the umbilical artery. Acta Obstet Gynecol Scand 2009; 88:350.
  23. Figueras F, Meler E, Eixarch E, et al. Association of smoking during pregnancy and fetal growth restriction: subgroups of higher susceptibility. Eur J Obstet Gynecol Reprod Biol 2008; 138:171.
  24. Aagaard-Tillery KM, Porter TF, Lane RH, et al. In utero tobacco exposure is associated with modified effects of maternal factors on fetal growth. Am J Obstet Gynecol 2008; 198:66.e1.
  25. Mendoza M, Ferrer-Oliveras R, Bonacina E, et al. Evaluating the Effect of Pravastatin in Early-Onset Fetal Growth Restriction: A Nonrandomized and Historically Controlled Pilot Study. Am J Perinatol 2021; 38:1472.
  26. Tita AT, Szychowski JM, Boggess K, et al. Treatment for Mild Chronic Hypertension during Pregnancy. N Engl J Med 2022; 386:1781.
  27. Ferreira RDDS, Negrini R, Bernardo WM, et al. The effects of sildenafil in maternal and fetal outcomes in pregnancy: A systematic review and meta-analysis. PLoS One 2019; 14:e0219732.
  28. Pels A, Derks J, Elvan-Taspinar A, et al. Maternal Sildenafil vs Placebo in Pregnant Women With Severe Early-Onset Fetal Growth Restriction: A Randomized Clinical Trial. JAMA Netw Open 2020; 3:e205323.
  29. Groom KM, McCowan LM, Mackay LK, et al. STRIDER NZAus: a multicentre randomised controlled trial of sildenafil therapy in early-onset fetal growth restriction. BJOG 2019; 126:997.
  30. Hessami K, Cozzolino M, Shamshirsaz AA. The effect of phosphodiesterase-5 inhibitors on uteroplacental and fetal cerebral perfusion in pregnancies with fetal growth restriction: A systematic review and meta-analysis. Eur J Obstet Gynecol Reprod Biol 2021; 267:129.
  31. Gülmezoglu AM, Hofmeyr GJ. Bed rest in hospital for suspected impaired fetal growth. Cochrane Database Syst Rev 2000; :CD000034.
  32. Gülmezoglu AM, Hofmeyr GJ. Plasma volume expansion for suspected impaired fetal growth. Cochrane Database Syst Rev 2000; :CD000167.
  33. Gülmezoglu AM, Hofmeyr GJ. Maternal nutrient supplementation for suspected impaired fetal growth. Cochrane Database Syst Rev 2000; :CD000148.
  34. Newnham JP, Godfrey M, Walters BJ, et al. Low dose aspirin for the treatment of fetal growth restriction: a randomized controlled trial. Aust N Z J Obstet Gynaecol 1995; 35:370.
  35. Gülmezoglu AM, Hofmeyr GJ. Maternal oxygen administration for suspected impaired fetal growth. Cochrane Database Syst Rev 2000; :CD000137.
  36. Yu YH, Shen LY, Zou H, et al. Heparin for patients with growth restricted fetus: a prospective randomized controlled trial. J Matern Fetal Neonatal Med 2010; 23:980.
  37. Gülmezoglu AM, Hofmeyr GJ. Betamimetics for suspected impaired fetal growth. Cochrane Database Syst Rev 2001; :CD000036.
  38. Pels A, Ganzevoort W, Kenny LC, et al. Interventions affecting the nitric oxide pathway versus placebo or no therapy for fetal growth restriction in pregnancy. Cochrane Database Syst Rev 2023; 7:CD014498.
  39. Say L, Gülmezoglu AM, Hofmeyr GJ. Maternal nutrient supplementation for suspected impaired fetal growth. Cochrane Database Syst Rev 2003; :CD000148.
  40. Kinshella MW, Omar S, Scherbinsky K, et al. Effects of Maternal Nutritional Supplements and Dietary Interventions on Placental Complications: An Umbrella Review, Meta-Analysis and Evidence Map. Nutrients 2021; 13.
  41. Fanaroff AA, Stoll BJ, Wright LL, et al. Trends in neonatal morbidity and mortality for very low birthweight infants. Am J Obstet Gynecol 2007; 196:147.e1.
  42. Lees C, Marlow N, Arabin B, 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; 42:400.
  43. Baschat AA, Cosmi E, Bilardo CM, et al. Predictors of neonatal outcome in early-onset placental dysfunction. Obstet Gynecol 2007; 109:253.
  44. Mari G, Hanif F, Treadwell MC, Kruger M. Gestational age at delivery and Doppler waveforms in very preterm intrauterine growth-restricted fetuses as predictors of perinatal mortality. J Ultrasound Med 2007; 26:555.
  45. American College of Obstetricians and Gynecologists’ Committee on Obstetric Practice, Society for Maternal-Fetal Medicine. Medically Indicated Late-Preterm and Early-Term Deliveries: ACOG Committee Opinion, Number 831. Obstet Gynecol 2021; 138:e35.
  46. Trudell AS, Cahill AG, Tuuli MG, et al. Risk of stillbirth after 37 weeks in pregnancies complicated by small-for-gestational-age fetuses. Am J Obstet Gynecol 2013; 208:376.e1.
  47. Caradeux J, Martinez-Portilla RJ, Basuki TR, et al. Risk of fetal death in growth-restricted fetuses with umbilical and/or ductus venosus absent or reversed end-diastolic velocities before 34 weeks of gestation: a systematic review and meta-analysis. Am J Obstet Gynecol 2018; 218:S774.
  48. Pilliod RA, Cheng YW, Snowden JM, et al. The risk of intrauterine fetal death in the small-for-gestational-age fetus. Am J Obstet Gynecol 2012; 207:318.e1.
  49. GRIT Study Group. A randomised trial of timed delivery for the compromised preterm fetus: short term outcomes and Bayesian interpretation. BJOG 2003; 110:27.
  50. Thornton JG, Hornbuckle J, Vail A, et al. Infant wellbeing at 2 years of age in the Growth Restriction Intervention Trial (GRIT): multicentred randomised controlled trial. Lancet 2004; 364:513.
  51. Walker DM, Marlow N, Upstone L, et al. The Growth Restriction Intervention Trial: long-term outcomes in a randomized trial of timing of delivery in fetal growth restriction. Am J Obstet Gynecol 2011; 204:34.e1.
  52. Boers KE, Vijgen SM, Bijlenga D, et al. Induction versus expectant monitoring for intrauterine growth restriction at term: randomised equivalence trial (DIGITAT). BMJ 2010; 341:c7087.
  53. Boers KE, van Wyk L, van der Post JA, et al. Neonatal morbidity after induction vs expectant monitoring in intrauterine growth restriction at term: a subanalysis of the DIGITAT RCT. Am J Obstet Gynecol 2012; 206:344.e1.
  54. van Wyk L, Boers KE, van der Post JA, et al. Effects on (neuro)developmental and behavioral outcome at 2 years of age of induced labor compared with expectant management in intrauterine growth-restricted infants: long-term outcomes of the DIGITAT trial. Am J Obstet Gynecol 2012; 206:406.e1.
  55. Lees CC, Marlow N, van Wassenaer-Leemhuis A, et al. 2 year neurodevelopmental and intermediate perinatal outcomes in infants with very preterm fetal growth restriction (TRUFFLE): a randomised trial. Lancet 2015; 385:2162.
  56. Visser GHA, Bilardo CM, Derks JB, et al. Fetal monitoring indications for delivery and 2-year outcome in 310 infants with fetal growth restriction delivered before 32 weeks' gestation in the TRUFFLE study. Ultrasound Obstet Gynecol 2017; 50:347.
  57. Werner EF, Savitz DA, Janevic TM, et al. Mode of delivery and neonatal outcomes in preterm, small-for-gestational-age newborns. Obstet Gynecol 2012; 120:560.
  58. Al-Hafez L, Bicocca MJ, Chauhan SP, Berghella V. Prostaglandins for induction in pregnancies with fetal growth restriction. Am J Obstet Gynecol MFM 2022; 4:100538.
  59. Familiari A, Khalil A, Rizzo G, et al. Adverse intrapartum outcome in pregnancies complicated by small for gestational age and late fetal growth restriction undergoing induction of labor with Dinoprostone, Misoprostol or mechanical methods: A systematic review and meta-analysis. Eur J Obstet Gynecol Reprod Biol 2020; 252:455.
  60. Bernardes TP, Broekhuijsen K, Koopmans CM, et al. Caesarean section rates and adverse neonatal outcomes after induction of labour versus expectant management in women with an unripe cervix: a secondary analysis of the HYPITAT and DIGITAT trials. BJOG 2016; 123:1501.
  61. Stockley EL, Ting JY, Kingdom JC, et al. Intrapartum magnesium sulfate is associated with neuroprotection in growth-restricted fetuses. Am J Obstet Gynecol 2018; 219:606.e1.
  62. Chauhan SP, Rice MM, Grobman WA, et al. Neonatal Morbidity of Small- and Large-for-Gestational-Age Neonates Born at Term in Uncomplicated Pregnancies. Obstet Gynecol 2017; 130:511.
  63. Delorme P, Kayem G, Lorthe E, et al. Neurodevelopment at 2 years and umbilical artery Doppler in cases of very preterm birth after prenatal hypertensive disorder or suspected fetal growth restriction: EPIPAGE-2 prospective population-based cohort study. Ultrasound Obstet Gynecol 2020; 56:557.
  64. Pels A, Beune IM, van Wassenaer-Leemhuis AG, et al. Early-onset fetal growth restriction: A systematic review on mortality and morbidity. Acta Obstet Gynecol Scand 2020; 99:153.
  65. Grandi SM, Filion KB, Yoon S, et al. Cardiovascular Disease-Related Morbidity and Mortality in Women With a History of Pregnancy Complications. Circulation 2019; 139:1069.
  66. Voskamp BJ, Kazemier BM, Ravelli AC, et al. Recurrence of small-for-gestational-age pregnancy: analysis of first and subsequent singleton pregnancies in The Netherlands. Am J Obstet Gynecol 2013; 208:374.e1.
  67. Ananth CV, Kaminsky L, Getahun D, et al. Recurrence of fetal growth restriction in singleton and twin gestations. J Matern Fetal Neonatal Med 2009; 22:654.
  68. Bhamidipaty-Pelosi S, Fox J, Greer RM, Kumar S. The risk of recurrent small-for-gestational-age infants at term is dependent on the number of previously affected births. Am J Obstet Gynecol 2021; 225:415.e1.
  69. Surkan PJ, Stephansson O, Dickman PW, Cnattingius S. Previous preterm and small-for-gestational-age births and the subsequent risk of stillbirth. N Engl J Med 2004; 350:777.
  70. Salihu HM, Sharma PP, Aliyu MH, et al. Is small for gestational age a marker of future fetal survival in utero? Obstet Gynecol 2006; 107:851.
  71. Gordon A, Raynes-Greenow C, McGeechan K, et al. Stillbirth risk in a second pregnancy. Obstet Gynecol 2012; 119:509.
  72. Xu T, Miao H, Chen Y, et al. Association of Interpregnancy Interval With Adverse Birth Outcomes. JAMA Netw Open 2022; 5:e2216658.
  73. Crovetto F, Crispi F, Casas R, et al. Effects of Mediterranean Diet or Mindfulness-Based Stress Reduction on Prevention of Small-for-Gestational Age Birth Weights in Newborns Born to At-Risk Pregnant Individuals: The IMPACT BCN Randomized Clinical Trial. JAMA 2021; 326:2150.
  74. Middleton P, Gomersall JC, Gould JF, et al. Omega-3 fatty acid addition during pregnancy. Cochrane Database Syst Rev 2018; 11:CD003402.
  75. Bussières EL, Tarabulsy GM, Pearson J, et al. Maternal prenatal stress and infant birth weight and gestational age: A meta-analysis of prospective studies. Dev Rev 2015; 23:179.
  76. Horvath A, Koletzko B, Szajewska H. Effect of supplementation of women in high-risk pregnancies with long-chain polyunsaturated fatty acids on pregnancy outcomes and growth measures at birth: a meta-analysis of randomized controlled trials. Br J Nutr 2007; 98:253.
  77. Szajewska H, Horvath A, Koletzko B. Effect of n-3 long-chain polyunsaturated fatty acid supplementation of women with low-risk pregnancies on pregnancy outcomes and growth measures at birth: a meta-analysis of randomized controlled trials. Am J Clin Nutr 2006; 83:1337.
  78. Roberge S, Nicolaides K, Demers S, et al. The role of aspirin dose on the prevention of preeclampsia and fetal growth restriction: systematic review and meta-analysis. Am J Obstet Gynecol 2017; 216:110.
  79. American College of Obstetricians and Gynecologists' Practice Advisory: Low-Dose Aspirin Use for the Prevention of Preeclampsia and Related Morbidity and Mortality. December 2021. https://www.acog.org/clinical/clinical-guidance/practice-advisory/articles/2021/12/low-dose-aspirin-use-for-the-prevention-of-preeclampsia-and-related-morbidity-and-mortality (Accessed on December 21, 2021).
  80. Groom KM, McCowan LM, Mackay LK, et al. Enoxaparin for the prevention of preeclampsia and intrauterine growth restriction in women with a history: a randomized trial. Am J Obstet Gynecol 2017; 216:296.e1.
  81. Rodger MA, Gris JC, de Vries JIP, et al. Low-molecular-weight heparin and recurrent placenta-mediated pregnancy complications: a meta-analysis of individual patient data from randomised controlled trials. Lancet 2016; 388:2629.
  82. Indications for Outpatient Antenatal Fetal Surveillance: ACOG Committee Opinion, Number 828. Obstet Gynecol 2021; 137:e177.
  83. Lykke JA, Paidas MJ, Langhoff-Roos J. Recurring complications in second pregnancy. Obstet Gynecol 2009; 113:1217.
Topic 139556 Version 7.0

References

آیا می خواهید مدیلیب را به صفحه اصلی خود اضافه کنید؟