Standardized healthcare pathway in intrauterine growth restriction and minimum evidence-based care

Minimum evidence-based care in intrauterine growth-restricted fetuses and neonatal prognosis

BACKGROUND

Introduction: There is clear evidence that fetuses with intrauterine growth restriction (IUGR) do not receive the minimum evidence-based care during their antenatal management.

OBJECTIVE

Considering that optimal management of IUGR may reduce neonatal morbi-mortality in IUGR, the objective of the present study was to evaluate the impact of antenatal management of IUGR according to the recommendations of the French college of gynecologists and obstetricians (CNGOF) on the neonatal prognosis of IUGR fetuses.

STUDY DESIGN

From a historical cohort of 31,052 children, born at the Femme Mère Enfant hospital (Lyon, France) between January 1, 2011 and December 31, 2017, we selected the population of IUGR fetuses. The minimum evidence-based care (MEC) in the antenatal management of fetuses with IUGR was defined according to the CNGOF recommendations and neonatal prognosis of early and late IUGR fetuses were assessed based on the whether or not they received MEC. The neonatal prognosis was defined according to a composite criterion that included neonatal morbidity and mortality.

RESULTS

A total of 1020 fetuses with IUGR were studied. The application of MEC showed an improvement in the neonatal prognosis of early-onset IUGR (p = 0.003), and an improvement in the neonatal prognosis of IUGR born before 32 weeks (p = 0.030). Multivariate analysis confirmed the results showing an increase in neonatal morbi-mortality in early-onset IUGR in the absence of MEC with OR 1.79 (95% CI 1.01-3.19).

CONCLUSION

Diagnosed IUGR with MEC had a better neonatal prognosis when born before 32 weeks. Regardless of the birth term, MEC improved the neonatal prognosis of fetuses with early IUGR. Improvement in the rate of MEC during antenatal management has a significant impact on neonatal prognosis.

[Impact of the healthcare pathway on the rate of obstetrical interventions in small for gestational age fetuses (IATROPAG Study)]

BACKGROUND

While previous studies have demonstrated an improvement in implementation of clinical practices and an improved neonatal prognosis when growth restricted fetuses were followed within a standardized healthcare pathway, the objective of this study was to assess the prevalence of obstetric interventions in small-for-gestational-age (SGA) fetuses followed within a standardized care pathway compared to a traditional care pathway.

METHODS

We conducted a retrospective study between 2015 and 2017, in a type III maternity hospital in Lyon, in a population of SGA fetuses, considered as such in case of antenatal diagnosis of fetal weight<10th percentile but>3rd centile without umbilical Doppler abnormality during antenatal surveillance and without ultrasound argument suggesting intrauterine growth retardation (IUGR). We collected the gestational age at diagnosis, obstetrical events and prevention of preterm delivery (antenatal corticosteroids), gestation age at birth, the method of delivery (spontaneous or induced), indication of induction, the method of birth (spontaneous, instrumental extraction or caesarean section), and the immediate neonatal outcome including cord pH, Apgar score at 5minutes, birth weight and fetal sex. After diagnosis, the choice of the pathway was left to the practitioner depending on their habit, their ability to manage the follow-up and their organizational constraints.

RESULTS

Over the study period, and after exclusion of IUGR, 96 SGA were followed up in the traditional pathway and 106 SGA were followed up in the standardized pathway P=0.75. The traditional pathway showed in multivariate analysis a higher prevalence of antenatal corticosteroid therapy for SGA (16,6%) between 2015 and 2017 with OR 7.3 95% CI [1.41-38.43] when compared to the standardized pathway (3,7%). Similarly, the traditional pathway proposes a higher prevalence of induction of labor (54,1%) than the standardized pathway (33,9%) between 2015 and 2017 with OR 3.19 95% CI [1.70-7.80]. The "a posteriori" post-hoc power of the study is 82.9%.

CONCLUSION

This study confirms the absence of excessive obstetrical intervention in the SGA population when followed in a standardized healthcare pathway. The latter would reduce unnecessary obstetrical interventions while respecting the intrinsic neonatal prognosis of small for gestational age fetuses.