Official Proceedings - AIUM

More documents

Recommendations

Info

American Institute of Ultrasound in Medicine <strong>Proceedings</strong> J Ultrasound Med 32(suppl):S1–S134, 2013.05) and demonstrated a trend toward a lower BPD and FTD (P < .1) comparedto OMT patients.Conclusions—Prenatal ultrasound evaluation of the CCD andTCD correlate with biomarker-proven PAE. These results indicate that ultrasoundparameters may be helpful in conjunction with other diagnostic indicesin detecting PAE. Future studies need to examine the predictive utilityof ultrasound indices on neurodevelopmental outcomes in children with PAE.1521317 Effect of Maternal Body Mass Index on Fetal Growth: Useof Individualized Growth Assessment and 2-Level ModelingTimothy Canavan, 1 * Russell Deter 2 1 Obstetrics, Gynecology,and Reproductive Sciences, University of Pittsburgh–Magee Women’s Hospital, Pittsburgh, Pennsylvania USA;2Obstetrics and Gynecology, Baylor College of Medicine,Houston, Texas USAObjectives—To determine the effect of the maternal body massindex (BMI) on fetal biometry estimates of growth using individualgrowth assessment (IGA) and 2-level linear modeling.Methods—A retrospective review of serial biometry in the secondand third trimesters from 246 normal term singleton fetuses was performed.Four to 8 biparietal diameter (BPD), head circumference (HC),abdominal circumference (AC), and femur diaphysis length (FDL) measurementsper fetus were available and used to determine second-trimestergrowth rates. Expected third-trimester size trajectories were generatedfrom these data and percent deviations (%Dev = [{observed – expected}/expected] × 100) were calculated. Two-level linear modeling was used todetermine individual %Dev slopes and the effect of BMI on these slopes.Relationships between individual second- and third-trimester slopes andBMI values were also evaluated using regression analysis.Results—Linear regression analysis of second-trimester growthindicated no significant relationships between the fetal growth rate andthe BMI (adjusted R 2 = 0.0%–1.0% except for AC in 1 subgroup [5.6%]).With third-trimester %Dev slopes, there was a definite BMI effect for HC,but only a marginal effect was seen for AC (critical value = 1.98; t = 2.00).There was no BMI effect on BPD or FDL slopes. Regression analysis indicatedno significant relationships (adjusted R 2 = 0%–0.2%) betweenBMI values and third-trimester %Dev slopes for any anatomic parameter.Conclusions—Our findings support the premise that the maternalBMI does not alter fetal growth in either the second or thirdtrimester. It also demonstrates that IGA and 2-level linear modeling, usedtogether, can assess the effect of an extrinsic factor on fetal growth.1541336 Cerebral Autoregulation in Normal PregnancyTeelkien van Veen, 1 * Sina Haeri, 2 Rodrigo Ruano, 2 RonnyPanerai, 3 Gerda Zeeman, 1,4 Michael Belfort 2 1 Obstetrics andGynecology, University Medical Center Groningen, Groningen,the Netherlands; 2 Obstetrics and Gynecology, BaylorCollege of Medicine, Houston, Texas USA; 3 CardiovascularSciences, University of Leicester, Leicester Royal Infirmary,Leicester, England; 4 Obstetrics and Gynecology, Erasmus MedicalCenter, Rotterdam, the NetherlandsObjectives—Recent advances in transcranial Doppler (TCD)methodology now allow direct real-time estimation of the functional state ofcerebral autoregulation. Since no normative data exist for pregnant patients,our aim was to establish baseline data for cerebral autoregulation in healthypregnancy against which women with disease states can be compared.Methods—In this prospective cohort analysis, cerebral bloodflow velocity (CBFV) in the middle cerebral artery (using TCD), bloodpressure (using noninvasive continuous plethysmography), and end–tidalcarbon dioxide (etCO 2) were simultaneously evaluated at baseline andduring voluntary breath holding (increased etCO 2). The transfer functionparameters (gain, phase, and coherence in the low-frequency range [
American Institute of Ultrasound in Medicine <strong>Proceedings</strong> J Ultrasound Med 32(suppl):S1–S134, 20131537546 Early Second-Trimester Fetal Anatomy Scans Improvethe Rate of Complete Anatomy Scans in Obese PatientsSimi Gupta,* Judith Chervenak, Ilan Timor, AnaMonteagudo Obstetrics and Gynecology, New York University,New York, New York USAObjectives—Fetal anatomy scans are more difficult to performon obese patients. However, there are little data available on methods toimprove the rate of complete anatomy scans in these patients. The objectiveof this study was to determine if the addition of an early secondtrimesterfetal anatomy scan improves the rate of complete anatomyultrasound examinations in obese patients.Methods—This was a prospective cohort study at an inner-citypublic hospital of 100 obese patients who were scheduled for a fetalanatomy scan via transvaginal and transabdominal modalities at 14 to 16weeks’ gestation (early fetal anatomy) and an anatomy scan at 18 to 22weeks’ gestation (routine fetal anatomy). Inclusion criteria were body massindex (BMI) >30 kg/m 2 , singleton pregnancy, and presentation for prenatalcare prior to 16 weeks’ gestation. Data for the routine anatomy scanalone versus the combination of early anatomy and routine anatomy scanswas calculated using the McNemar χ 2 test for categorical outcomes andWilcoxon signed ranks test for continuous variables.Results—The range of BMI in the study was 30–49.6 kg/m 2with an average BMI of 34.3 kg/m 2 . Table 1 shows the results for the routineanatomy scan alone and the combination of early anatomy and routineanatomy scans.Conclusions—The addition of an early second-trimester fetalanatomy ultrasound scan significantly improves the rate of completeanatomic scans and mean number of items seen in obese patients. The additionof this ultrasound scan may improve the detection of congenitalanomalies in obese patients.Table 1Routine Early and RoutineAnatomy Anatomy Combination P% complete anatomy 42 51 < .01Mean no. of items seen (1–21) 18.6 19.4 < .01S72
Page 1 and 2:
2013Journal ofUltrasoundin Medicine
Page 5 and 6:
Small-Animal Preclinical High-Frequ
Page 7 and 8:
2013 AIUM Award WinnersJoseph H. Ho
Page 9 and 10:
2013 AIUM Award WinnersDistinguishe
Page 11 and 12:
Endowment for Education andResearch
Page 13 and 14:
Rosa De Vermette, MD, RDCS,RDMS, RO
Page 15 and 16:
Kee-Hak Lim, MDG. Sharat Lin, PhDTo
Page 17 and 18:
David Stark, MDA. Thomas Stavros, M
Page 19 and 20:
*Presenter of scientific paper with
Page 21 and 22:
American Institute of Ultrasound in
Page 23 and 24:
Page 25 and 26:
Page 27 and 28:
Page 29 and 30:
Page 31 and 32:
Page 33 and 34:
Page 35 and 36:
Page 37 and 38:
Page 39 and 40: American Institute of Ultrasound in
Page 89: American Institute of Ultrasound in
Page 140 and 141:
Page 142 and 143:
Page 144 and 145:
Page 146 and 147:
Page 148 and 149:
Page 150 and 151:
Page 152 and 153:
Page 154:
© Greater Phoenix CVB
show all

Official Proceedings - AIUM

You also want an ePaper? Increase the reach of your titles

Delete template?

Save as template?