Volume 11, Issue 9 (12-2013)                   IJRM 2013, 11(9): 705-0 | Back to browse issues page

XML Persian Abstract Print

Download citation:
BibTeX | RIS | EndNote | Medlars | ProCite | Reference Manager | RefWorks
Send citation to:
Asgharnia M, Faraji R, Salamat F, Ashrafkhani B, Dalil Heirati S F, Naimian S. Perinatal outcomes of pregnancies with borderline versus normal amniotic fluid index. IJRM 2013; 11 (9) :705-0
URL: http://ijrm.ir/article-1-467-en.html
Perinatal outcomes of pregnancies with borderline versus normal amniotic fluid index
Maryam Asgharnia1 , Roya Faraji * 2, Fatemeh Salamat3 , Babak Ashrafkhani4 , Seyedeh Fatemeh Dalil Heirati1 , Samira Naimian1
1- Reproductive Health Research Center, Department of Obstetrics and Gynecology, Guilan University of Medical Sciences, Rasht, Iran
2- Reproductive Health Research Center, Department of Obstetrics and Gynecology, Guilan University of Medical Sciences, Rasht, Iran , royafaraji1371@yahoo.com
3- Vice-chancellorship for Research, Guilan University of Medical Sciences, Rasht, Iran
4- Guilan University of Medical Sciences, Rasht, Iran
Abstract:   (3024 Views)
Background: Amniotic fluid is an indicator of placental function on the fetal development. The amniotic fluid index is the most commonly used method of measuring amniotic fluid.
Objective: The purpose of this study was to compare the pregnancy outcomes of a borderline versus normal AFI.
Materials and Methods: This cross-sectional study was carried out on a total of 235 pregnant women referred to Alzahra Medical Center between 2009-2011. Women with a singleton pregnancy in third trimester were enrolled into this study; of these subjects, 141 cases were in normal AFI group and 94 cases in borderline AFI group. Adequate information was obtained from the patients' medical record and the groups were compared on maternal and fetal complications. Data analysis was performed by using SPSS.
Results: The mean maternal age in borderline AFI group was 25.96±5.92 years and in normal AFI group was 27.88±6.5 years (p=0.023). Maternal outcomes such as preterm delivery and labor induction in women with borderline AFI were considerably higher than those in normal group (p=0.01 and p=0.001). There were no significant differences between the two groups in terms of high blood pressure, preeclampsia, diabetes and neonatal respiratory distress. The borderline AFI group had higher rate of neonatal complications such as Apgar score of less than 7 (p=0.004), IUGR (0.0001), LBW (0.001), and crucial need to NICU (0.003).
Conclusion: Findings indicated that there are statistical differences between adverse outcomes in borderline AFI group and normal group.
Keywords: Borderline, Amniotic fluid index, Pregnancy outcome, Pregnancy complication
Full-Text [PDF 459 kb]   (591 Downloads) |   |   Full-Text (HTML)  (613 Views)  
Type of Study: Original Article |
References
1. Magann EF, Chauhan SP, Hitt WC, Dubil EA, Morrison JC. Borderline or marginalamniotic fluid index and peri-partum outcomes: a review of the literature. J Ultrasound Med 2011; 30: 523-528. [DOI:10.7863/jum.2011.30.4.523]
2. Ali HS. Assessment of amniotic fluid index in normal pregnancy at a tertiary care hospital setting. J Ayub Med Coll Abbottabad 2009; 21: 149-151.
3. Karim R, Jabeen S, Pervaiz F, Wahab S, Yasmeen S, Raees M. Decreased amniotic fluid index and adverse pregnancy outcome at term. JPMI 2010; 4: 307-311.
4. Voxman EG, Tran S, Wing DA. Low amniotic fluid index as a predictor of adverse perinatal outcome. J Perinatol 2002; 22: 282-185. [DOI:10.1038/sj.jp.7210697]
5. Pankaj D, Purvi P, Anjali G. Decrease of amniotic fluid index in low- risk pregnancy. Any significance? J Obstet Gynecol Ind 2004; 54: 464-466.
6. Magann EF, Chauhan SP, Bofill JA, Martin JN Jr. Comparability of the amniotic fluid index and single deepest pocket measurements in clinical practice. Aust N Z J Obstet Gynaecol 2003; 43: 75-77. [DOI:10.1046/j.0004-8666.2003.00002.x]
7. Anderson D, Yang Q, Hohimer A, Faber J, Gi Raud G, Davi SL. Int r amembranous absorption rate is unaffected by changes in amniotic fluid composition. Am J Physiol Renal Physiol 2005; 288: 964-968. [DOI:10.1152/ajprenal.00407.2004]
8. Phelan JP, Smith CV, Broussard P, Small M. Amniotic fluid volume assessment with the four-quadrant technique at 36-42 weeks' gestation. J Reprod Med 1987; 32: 540-542.
9. Rutherford SE, Phelan JP, Smith CV, Jacobs N. The 4 quadrant assessment of amniotic fluid volume: An adjunct to antepartum fetal heart rate testing. Obstet Gynecol 1987; 70: 353-356.
10. Kwon JY, Kwon HS, Kim YH, Park YW. Abnormal Doppler velocimetry is related to adverse pregnancy outcome for borderline amniotic fluid index in the third trimester. J Obstet Gynecol Res 2006; 32: 545-549. [DOI:10.1111/j.1447-0756.2006.00459.x]
11. Haas DM, Magann EF. External cephalic version with an amniotic fluid index DOI:10.1080/14767050500277586]
12. Gumus II, Koktener A, Turhan NO. Perinatal outcome of pregnancies with borderline amniotic fluid index. Arch Gynecol Obstet 2007; 276: 17-19. [DOI:10.1007/s00404-006-0309-x]
13. Banks EH, Miller DA. Perinatal risks associated with borderline amniotic fluid index. Am J Obstet Gynecol 1999; 180: 1461-1463. [DOI:10.1016/S0002-9378(99)70037-2]
14. Baron C, Morgan MA, Garite TJ. The impact of amniotic fluid volume assessed intrapartum on perinatal outcome. Am J Obstet Gynecol 1995; 173: 167-174. [DOI:10.1016/0002-9378(95)90185-X]
15. Akhter H, Guha K, Daisy KP. Amniotic Fluid Index in High Risk Pregnancies and Pregnancy Outcome. Dinajpur Med Col J 2010; 3: 1-5.
16. Petrozella LN, Dashe JS, McIntire DD, Leveno KJ. Clinical significance of borderline amniotic fluid index and oligohydramnios in preterm pregnancy. Obstet Gynecol 2011; 117: 338-342. [DOI:10.1097/AOG.0b013e3182056766]
17. Luo X, Huang Y, Liang R. [Analysis of 196 cases of trial of labor with borderline oligohydramnios assessed by ultrasound. Zhonghua Fu Chan KeZaZhi 1988; 33: 585-587. (In Chinese)
18. Locatelli A, Zagarella A, Toso L, Assi F, Ghidini A, Biffi A. Serial assessment of amniotic fluid index in uncomplicated term pregnancies: prognostic value of amniotic fluid reduction. J Matern Fetal Neonatal Med 2004; 15: 233-236. [DOI:10.1080/14767050410001668671]
19. Manslow AS, Sweeny AL. Elective induction of labor as a risk factor for cesarean delivery among low-risk women at term. Obstet Gynecol 2000; 95: 917-922.
20. Cammu H, Martens G, Ruyssinck G, Amy JJ. Outcome after elective labor induction in nulliparous women: a matched cohort study. Am J Obstet Gynecol 2002; 186: 240-244. [DOI:10.1067/mob.2002.119643]
21. Ehrenthal SB, Jiang X, Strobino DM. Labor induction and the risk of a cesarean delivery among nulliparous women. Obstet Gynecol 2010; 116: 35-42. [DOI:10.1097/AOG.0b013e3181e10c5c]
22. Ott WJ. Reevaluation of the relationship between amniotic fluid volume and perinatal outcome. Am J Obstet Gynecol 2005; 192: 1803-1809. [DOI:10.1016/j.ajog.2004.12.062]
23. Youssef AA, Abdulla SA, Sayed EH, Salem HT, Abdelalim AM, DevoeLD. Superiority of amniotic fluid index over amniotic fluid pocket measurement for predicting bad fetal outcome. South Med J 1993; 86: 426-429. [DOI:10.1097/00007611-199304000-00011]
Send email to the article author

Rights and permissions
Creative Commons License This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial 4.0 International License.

Designed & Developed by : Yektaweb