A critical appraisal of the use of umbilical artery Doppler ultrasound in high‐risk pregnancies: use of meta‐analyses in evidence‐based obstetrics
- 1 June 2001
- journal article
- research article
- Published by Wiley in Ultrasound in Obstetrics & Gynecology
- Vol. 17 (6) , 466-476
- https://doi.org/10.1046/j.1469-0705.2001.00415.x
Abstract
Objectives: To reanalyze randomized controlled trials on the use of umbilical artery Doppler velocimetry in high‐risk pregnancies and determine which high‐risk pregnancies benefit from the use of Doppler velocimetry.Methods: Searching Medline, the Cochrane Library and Embase we found 13 randomized controlled trials on the use of Doppler velocimetry in high‐risk pregnancies. Of these, six included pregnancies with strictly defined suspected intrauterine growth restriction and/or hypertensive disease of pregnancy (‘well‐defined studies’); the rest included a great variety of high‐risk pregnancies (‘general risk studies’). The studies were analyzed with particular regard to the heterogeneity and to outcome. Audits of the perinatal deaths reported in the randomized controlled trials were performed by a panel of 32 international experts.Results: The ‘well‐defined studies’ had a more uniform study design as compared to the ‘general risk studies’ and they showed a significant reduction in antenatal admissions (odds ratio, 0.56; 95% confidence interval, 0.43–0.72), inductions of labor (0.78; 0.63–0.96), elective deliveries (inductions of labor and elective Cesarean sections) (0.73; 0.61–0.88) and Cesarean sections (0.78; 0.65–0.94). By perinatal audit it was found that more perinatal deaths in the ‘well‐defined studies’ were potentially avoidable by use of Doppler velocimetry (P < 0.0005) and the rate of avoidable perinatal deaths was higher among controls (50%) than cases (20%) in this group.Conclusion: The randomized controlled trials on umbilical artery Doppler velocimetry show major differences regarding study design and technical and clinical issues and, therefore, they should not be pooled in a simple meta‐analysis. By stratification it was found that only in pregnancies with suspected intrauterine growth restriction and/or hypertensive disease of pregnancy will the use of umbilical artery Doppler velocimetry reduce the number of perinatal deaths and unnecessary obstetric interventions. Copyright © 2001 International Society of Ultrasound in Obstetrics and GynecologyKeywords
This publication has 31 references indexed in Scilit:
- Doppler ultrasonography in suspected intrauterine growth retardation: a randomized clinical trialUltrasound in Obstetrics & Gynecology, 1997
- Umbilical artery Doppler velocimetry: Clinical utility in high-risk pregnanciesAmerican Journal of Obstetrics and Gynecology, 1996
- Assessing the Quality of Randomized Controlled Trials:Current Issues and Future DirectionsInternational Journal of Technology Assessment in Health Care, 1996
- Randomized controlled trials of umbilical artery Doppler velocimetry: how many are too many?Ultrasound in Obstetrics & Gynecology, 1995
- Doppler ultrasonography in high-risk pregnancies: Systematic review with meta-analysisAmerican Journal of Obstetrics and Gynecology, 1995
- The role of Doppler velocimetry in the management of high risk pregnanciesBJOG: An International Journal of Obstetrics and Gynaecology, 1994
- The effect of introduction of umbilical Doppler recordings to obstetric practiceBJOG: An International Journal of Obstetrics and Gynaecology, 1993
- Do we need randomised trials of antenatal tests of fetal wellbeing?BJOG: An International Journal of Obstetrics and Gynaecology, 1993
- Comparison of umbilical-artery velocimetry and cardiotocography for surveillance of small-for-gestational-age fetusesThe Lancet, 1992
- UMBILICAL ARTERY FLOW VELOCITY WAVEFORMS IN HIGH-RISK PREGNANCYThe Lancet, 1987