DOI: https://doi.org/10.22263/2312-4156.2024.5.9
A.N. Chukanov
Assessment of fetus development and state: current ultrasound examination protocols and findings interpretation. The review of existing practice with comments and remarks
Vitebsk State Order of Peoples’ Friendship Medical University, Vitebsk, Republic of Belarus
Vestnik VGMU. 2024;23(5):9-16.
Abstract.
The system of prenatal diagnostics of congenital fetal anomalies established and functioning today in the Republic of Belarus, based on the advanced achievements and developments of domestic specialists, analysis of the best world experience, refers our country to the states with the lowest level of infant mortality in the world. The approval of the standardizing document in the Republic of Belarus, which at present determines the organization of ultrasound examination of the fetus anatomy and functional state, made it possible to specify the minimum mandatory list of fetal structures for ultrasound examination depending on the pregnancy trimester, to protect physicians from unfounded claims of patients regarding incomplete ultrasound screening.
The objective of the paper is to study and to assess objectively the views of scientific communities on the indications and protocols for conducting ultrasound examinations of the fetus depending on the trimester of pregnancy, expanding the range of knowledge on the effectiveness of studying each of the fetal structures, supplementing it with the global experience.
High-quality organization of prenatal diagnostics determines the reduction of perinatal losses, the effectiveness of prenatal counseling; it provides prognostic information for making clinical decisions, promotes the development of fetal therapy, preventing the death of the fetus and newborn, and also changing the natural course of fetal and neonatal diseases.
Keywords: pregnancy, prenatal ultrasound diagnostics, standard ultrasound screening examination, specialized ultrasound examination.
References
1. AIUM-ACR-ACOG-SMFM-SRU Practice Parameter for the Performance of Standard Diagnostic Obstetric Ultrasound Examinations. Ultrasound Med. 2018 Nov;37(11):E13-E24. doi: http://dx.doi.org/10.1002/jum.14831
2. Copel JA. Obstetric ultrasound terminology. Semin Perinatol. 2013 Oct;37(5):305-6. doi: http://dx.doi.org/10.1053/j.semperi.2013.06.018
3. Mei JY, Afshar Y, Platt LD. First-Trimester Ultrasound. Obstet Gynecol Clin North Am. 2019 Dec;46(4):829-52. doi: http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.ogc.2019.07.011
4. Nevo O, Brown R, Glanc P, Lim K. No. 352-Technical Update: The Role of Early Comprehensive Fetal Anatomy Ultrasound Examination. J Obstet Gynaecol Can. 2017 Dec;39(12):1203-11. doi: http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.jogc.2017.06.031
5. Doubilet PM. Ultrasound evaluation of the first trimester. Radiol Clin North Am. 2014 Nov;52(6):1191-9. doi: http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.rcl.2014.07.004
6. Chukanov AN. A comprehensive approach to improving prenatal diagnosis of congenital developmental anomalies. Minsk, RB: BelMAPO; 2020. 307 р. (In Russ.)
7. Persico N, Moratalla J, Lombardi CM, Zidere V, Allan L, Nicolaides KH. Fetal echocardiography at 11-13 weeks by transabdominal high-frequency ultrasound. Ultrasound Obstet Gynecol. 2011 Mar;37(3):296-301. doi: http://dx.doi.org/10.1002/uog.8934
8. Shainker SA, Coleman B, Timor-Tritsch IE, Bhide A, Bromley B, Cahill AG, et al. Special Report of the Society for Maternal-Fetal Medicine Placenta Accreta Spectrum Ultrasound Marker Task Force: Consensus on definition of markers and approach to the ultrasound examination in pregnancies at risk for placenta accreta spectrum. Am J Obstet Gynecol. 2021 Jan;224(1):B2-B14. doi: http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.ajog.2020.09.001
9. Silver RM, Branch DW. Placenta Accreta Spectrum. N Engl J Med. 2018 Apr 19;378(16):1529-1536. doi: http://dx.doi.org/10.1056/NEJMcp1709324
10. AIUM Practice Parameter for the Performance of Detailed Diagnostic Obstetric Ultrasound Examinations Between 12 Weeks 0 Days and 13 Weeks 6 Days. J Ultrasound Med. 2021 May;40(5):E1-E16. doi: http://dx.doi.org/10.1002/jum.15477
11. Nicolaides KH, Spencer K, Avgidou K, Faiola S, Falcon O. Multicenter study of first-trimester screening for trisomy 21 in 75 821 pregnancies: results and estimation of the potential impact of individual risk-orientated two-stage first-trimester screening / K. H. Nicolaides. Ultrasound Obstet Gynecol. 2005 Mar;25(3):221-6. doi: http://dx.doi.org/10.1002/uog.1860
12. AIUM Practice Parameter for the Performance of Detailed Second- and Third-Trimester Diagnostic Obstetric Ultrasound Examinations. J Ultrasound Med. 2019 Dec;38(12):3093-3100. doi: http://dx.doi.org/10.1002/jum.15163
13. AIUM Practice Parameter for the Performance of Limited Obstetric Ultrasound Examinations by Advanced Clinical Providers. J Ultrasound Med. 2018 Jul;37(7):1587-1596. doi: http://dx.doi.org/10.1002/jum.14677
14. Lee WA, Nelson G, Grogan SP. Sonography 1st Trimester Assessment, Protocols, and Interpretation. In: StatPearls. Treasure Island (FL): StatPearls Publishing; 2024. https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/books/NBK573070/
15. United Nations Inter-Agency Group for Child Mortality Estimation (UN IGME) Report 2022. https://www.childhealthtaskforce.org/resources/report/2023/united-nations-inter-agency-group-child-mortality-estimation-un-igme-report
Submitted 07.08.2024
Accepted 18.10.2024
Information about authors:
A.N. Chukanov – Doctor of Medical Sciences, Rector of Vitebsk State Order of Peoples’ Friendship Medical University, associate professor of the chair of reproductive medicine, obstetrics and gynecology with the course of the Faculty for Advanced Training and Retraining, Vitebsk State Order of Peoples’ Friendship Medical University;
e-mail: Этот адрес электронной почты защищён от спам-ботов. У вас должен быть включен JavaScript для просмотра. – Aleksey Nikolaevich Chukanov.
