Doppler ultrasound of umbilical and middle cerebral artery in third trimester small‐for‐gestational age fetuses to decide on timing of delivery for suspected fetal growth restriction: A cohort with nested RCT (DRIGITAT)

Mauritia C. Marijnen,Hester D. Kamphof,Stefanie E. Damhuis,Maddy Smies,Aleid G. Leemhuis,Hans Wolf,Sanne J. Gordijn,Wessel Ganzevoort,DRIGITAT Trial Group,Jelle M. Schaaf,Marjon A. de Boer,Joost J. Zwart,Anjoke J. M. Huisjes,Jan H. W. Veerbeek,Judith O. E. H. van Laar,Salwan Al‐Nasiry,Henk A. Bremer,Brenda B. J. Hermsen,Hedwig P. van de Nieuwenhof,Marieke Sueters,David P. van der Ham,Marinka S. Post,Arjanne J. Kroese,Jan B. Derks,Marko J. Sikkema,Jan Willem de Leeuw
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1111/1471-0528.17770
2024-02-07
BJOG An International Journal of Obstetrics & Gynaecology
Abstract:Objective To assess the association of the umbilicocerebral ratio (UCR) with adverse perinatal outcome in late preterm small‐for‐gestational age (SGA) fetuses and to investigate the effect on perinatal outcomes of immediate delivery. Design Multicentre cohort study with nested randomised controlled trial (RCT). Setting Nineteen secondary and tertiary care centres. Population Singleton SGA pregnancies (estimated fetal weight [EFW] or fetal abdominal circumference [FAC] <10th centile) from 32 to 36+6 weeks. Methods Women were classified: (1) RCT‐eligible: abnormal UCR twice consecutive and EFW below the 3rd centile at/or below 35 weeks or below the 10th centile at 36 weeks; (2) abnormal UCR once or intermittent; (3) never abnormal UCR. Consenting RCT‐eligible patients were randomised for immediate delivery from 34 weeks or expectant management until 37 weeks. Main outcome measures A composite adverse perinatal outcome (CAPO), defined as perinatal death, birth asphyxia or major neonatal morbidity. Results The cohort consisted of 690 women. The study was halted prematurely for low RCT‐inclusion rates (n = 40). In the RCT‐eligible group, gestational age at delivery, birthweight and birthweight multiple of the median (MoM) (0.66, 95% confidence interval [CI] 0.59–0.72) were significantly lower and the CAPO (n = 50, 44%, p
obstetrics & gynecology
What problem does this paper attempt to address?