SORA

Advancing, promoting and sharing knowledge of health through excellence in teaching, clinical practice and research into the prevention and treatment of illness

Does gestational age influence the predictive accuracy of the cerebroplacental ratio for intrapartum fetal compromise?

Morales-Roselló, J; Khalil, A; Buongiorno, S; Brik, M; Mendoza, M; Di Fabrizio, C; Scarinci, E; Salvi, S (2025) Does gestational age influence the predictive accuracy of the cerebroplacental ratio for intrapartum fetal compromise? AJOG Global Reports, 6 (1). p. 100585. ISSN 2666-5778 https://doi.org/10.1016/j.xagr.2025.100585
SGUL Authors: Khalil, Asma

[img] PDF Published Version
Available under License Creative Commons Attribution Non-commercial No Derivatives.

Download (1MB)
[img] Microsoft PowerPoint (Supplementary materials) Supporting information
Download (1MB)

Abstract

BACKGROUND: The accuracy of the cerebroplacental ratio (CPR) in predicting cesarean section for intrapartum fetal compromise (CS-IFC) prior to the onset of labor remains controversial. OBJECTIVES: To determine whether advancing gestational age (GA) in the final weeks of pregnancy enhances the predictive performance of CPR and other sonographic parameters for CS-IFC before labor. STUDY DESIGN: This multicentre retrospective study analysed 590 singleton pregnancies across four tertiary centres in Spain, Italy, and the UK. All participants underwent Doppler ultrasound assessment between 35+0 and 41+0 weeks of gestation and delivered within 24 hours of examination. CS-IFC was defined by abnormal intrapartum fetal heart rate patterns or fetal scalp pH <7.20 necessitating emergency caesarean delivery. The predictive performance of CPR, middle cerebral artery (MCA) pulsatility index (PI), and umbilical artery (UA) PI-expressed as multiples of the median (MoM)-was evaluated using ROC curve analysis and logistic regression, alone and in combination with estimated fetal weight centile (EFWc), fetal sex, and type of labour onset (TLO), stratified by gestational age. RESULTS: The highest overall predictive performance between 35 and 40 weeks of gestation was observed with the use of CPR MoM and MCA PI MoM (AUC 0.71, 95% confidence interval [95% CI], 0.64-0.79, P<.00001, AIC 343.6; AUC 0.70, 95% CI, 0.63-0.77, P<.00001, AIC 346.5, respectively). Predictive accuracy further improved with the inclusion of estimated fetal weight centile (EFWc) (AUC 0.73, CI 0.66-0.80, P<.00001, AIC 339.3; AUC 0.74, CI 0.68-0.80, P<.00001, AIC 336.4), and was enhanced even more when additional clinical variables, such as fetal sex and type of labor onset were incorporated (AUC 0.77, CI 0.71-0.83, P<.00001, AIC 327; AUC 0.78, CI 0.72-0.84, P<.00001, AIC 323.9).Across all models, predictive accuracy improved with advancing GA (P<.00001), peaking at 39 to 40 weeks. This trend was evident for cerebral Doppler indices (CPR MoM and MCA PI MoM), but not for UA PI or EFWc. The improvement in performance remained significant even when only fetuses appropriate for gestational age were analyzed. CONCLUSION: The predictive ability of cerebral Doppler for CS-IFC, in both high- and low-risk pregnancies, increases with advancing gestational age during the last weeks of gestation.

Item Type: Article
Additional Information: © 2025 The Authors. Published by Elsevier Inc. This is an open access article under the CC BY-NC-ND license (http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc-nd/4.0/)
Keywords: Cerebroplacental ratio, fetal Doppler, middle cerebral artery Doppler, prediction of labor outcome
SGUL Research Institute / Research Centre: Academic Structure > Cardiovascular & Genomics Research Institute
Academic Structure > Cardiovascular & Genomics Research Institute > Vascular Biology
Journal or Publication Title: AJOG Global Reports
ISSN: 2666-5778
Language: en
Media of Output: Electronic-eCollection
Related URLs:
Publisher License: Creative Commons: Attribution-Noncommercial-No Derivative Works 4.0
Dates:
Date Event
2025-12-26 Published
2025-11-17 Published Online
URI: https://openaccess.sgul.ac.uk/id/eprint/118253
Publisher's version: https://doi.org/10.1016/j.xagr.2025.100585

Actions (login required)

Edit Item Edit Item