Discordant umbilical artery flow velocity waveforms in spontaneous umbilical cord hematoma

Doppler velocimetry discordance between paired umbilical artery vessels and clinical implications in fetal growth restriction

BACKGROUND

Studies revealing a discrepancy in umbilical artery Dopplers between the two umbilical arteries in normally-grown fetuses necessitates further evaluation of the paired umbilical arteries in the setting of fetal growth restriction as this is a critical component in the surveillance of this population.

OBJECTIVE

Umbilical artery Doppler sampling in fetal growth restriction is typically assessed in 1 umbilical artery in a free loop of cord. Although discrepancies of >20% between the 2 umbilical arteries occur in 1 of 3 normal pregnancies, this has not been assessed in fetal growth restriction. Our objectives were to determine the frequency of discordant Doppler pulsatility indices between paired umbilical arteries in a fetal growth restriction cohort and to determine if sampling of 1 or both arteries alters surveillance or timing of delivery.

STUDY DESIGN

A cohort of 425 growth-restricted fetuses between 25 and 39 weeks of gestation had umbilical artery Doppler pulsatility indices determined from both umbilical arteries in a midsegment of the cord to determine: (1) the discrepancy percentage between paired umbilical artery pulsatility indices and (2) the frequency of both arteries being normal, abnormal, or discordant (pulsatility index < and >95th percentile). To determine what sampling method increased the detection of an abnormal Doppler index, 3 sampling methods were compared: (1) average pulsatility index from both umbilical arteries, (2) pulsatility index from 1 umbilical artery chosen randomly, and (3) highest pulsatility index of the 2 umbilical arteries.

RESULTS

The mean percentage difference between umbilical artery pulsatility indices was 11.7%, and in 15.8% of cases, it exceeded 20%. Both umbilical artery pulsatility indices were normal in 71.1% (302/425), abnormal in 12.2% (52/425), and discordant in 16.7% (71/425) of cases (P<.0001). Of the 3 sampling methods, the pulsatility index was abnormal in: (1) 19.2% (82/425) of cases when averaged from both umbilical arteries, (2) 22.1% (94/425) of cases when choosing 1 umbilical artery at random, and (3) 28.9% (123/425) of cases when the highest umbilical artery pulsatility index was used (P=.003).

CONCLUSION

In this large fetal growth restriction cohort, the overall discrepancy between the 2 umbilical artery pulsatility indices was 11.7%. Among fetuses with at least 1 abnormal umbilical artery pulsatility index, 71 of 123 (57.7%) had 1 normal pulsatility index and 1 abnormal. Thus, the number of arteries sampled and the sampling method used may alter clinical decision-making, including frequency of surveillance and timing of delivery.

Clinically Relevant Prenatal Ultrasound Diagnosis of Umbilical Cord Pathology

Umbilical cord abnormalities are not rare, and are often associated with structural or chromosomal abnormalities, fetal intrauterine growth restriction, and poor pregnancy outcomes; the latter can be a result of prematurity, placentation deficiency or, implicitly, an increased index of cesarean delivery due to the presence of fetal distress, higher admission to neonatal intensive care, and increased prenatal mortality rates. Even if the incidence of velamentous insertion, vasa praevia and umbilical knots is low, these pathologies increase the fetal morbidity and mortality prenatally and intrapartum. There is a vast heterogeneity among societies’ guidelines regarding the umbilical cord examination. We consider the mandatory introduction of placental cord insertion examination in the first and second trimester to practice guidelines for fetal ultrasound scans. Moreover, during the mid-trimester scan, we recommend a transvaginal ultrasound and color Doppler assessment of the internal cervical os for low-lying placentas, marginal or velamentous cord insertion, and the evaluation of umbilical cord entanglement between the insertion sites whenever it is incidentally found. Based on the pathological description and the neonatal outcome reported for each entity, we conclude our descriptive review by establishing a new, clinically relevant classification of these umbilical cord anomalies.