Smarter Decisions,
Better Care

UpToDate synthesizes the most recent medical information into evidence-based practical recommendations clinicians trust to make the right point-of-care decisions.

  • Rigorous editorial process: Evidence-based treatment recommendations
  • World-Renowned physician authors: over 5,100 physician authors and editors around the globe
  • Innovative technology: integrates into the workflow; access from EMRs

Choose from the list below to learn more about subscriptions for a:


Subscribers log in here


Overview of fetal assessment

INTRODUCTION

The primary goal of antenatal testing is to identify fetuses at risk of intrauterine neurologic injury or death so that these adverse outcomes can be prevented. Many techniques for assessment of fetal well-being have been introduced into clinical practice, beginning in the 1970s (table 1). Despite widespread use of these techniques, there is limited evidence to guide their optimal use or to demonstrate their effectiveness at improving perinatal outcomes.

This topic will provide an overview of fetal assessment. Detailed discussions of the various techniques used and conditions where antenatal assessment is indicated are available separately. (See individual topic reviews).

RATIONALE

Fetal hypoxia and acidosis represent the final common pathway to fetal injury and death in many high risk pregnancies [1]. The basis for antepartum testing is the premise that the fetus whose oxygenation in utero is challenged will respond with a series of detectable physiologic adaptive or decompensatory signs as hypoxemia or frank metabolic acidemia develop. For example:

Blood flow is directed to the brain, heart, and adrenals and away from the kidney. The reduction in renal perfusion leads to decreased fetal urine production, which results in decreased amniotic fluid volume.

Fetal movements decrease as the fetus attempts to conserve energy [2]. The loss of fetal movement can be a sign of ongoing central nervous system hypoxia and injury.

                          

Subscribers log in here

To continue reading this article, you must log in with your personal, hospital, or group practice subscription. For more information or to purchase a personal subscription, click below on the option that best describes you:
Literature review current through: Mar 2014. | This topic last updated: Dec 11, 2013.
The content on the UpToDate website is not intended nor recommended as a substitute for medical advice, diagnosis, or treatment. Always seek the advice of your own physician or other qualified health care professional regarding any medical questions or conditions. The use of this website is governed by the UpToDate Terms of Use ©2014 UpToDate, Inc.
References
Top
  1. Vintzileos AM, Campbell WA, Rodis JF, et al. The relationship between fetal biophysical assessment, umbilical artery velocimetry, and fetal acidosis. Obstet Gynecol 1991; 77:622.
  2. Olesen AG, Svare JA. Decreased fetal movements: background, assessment, and clinical management. Acta Obstet Gynecol Scand 2004; 83:818.
  3. Hecher K, Bilardo CM, Stigter RH, et al. Monitoring of fetuses with intrauterine growth restriction: a longitudinal study. Ultrasound Obstet Gynecol 2001; 18:564.
  4. Ferrazzi E, Bozzo M, Rigano S, et al. Temporal sequence of abnormal Doppler changes in the peripheral and central circulatory systems of the severely growth-restricted fetus. Ultrasound Obstet Gynecol 2002; 19:140.
  5. Baschat AA, Gembruch U, Harman CR. The sequence of changes in Doppler and biophysical parameters as severe fetal growth restriction worsens. Ultrasound Obstet Gynecol 2001; 18:571.
  6. de Vries JI, Fong BF. Normal fetal motility: an overview. Ultrasound Obstet Gynecol 2006; 27:701.
  7. Neldam S. Fetal movements as an indicator of fetal well-being. Dan Med Bull 1983; 30:274.
  8. Grant A, Elbourne D, Valentin L, Alexander S. Routine formal fetal movement counting and risk of antepartum late death in normally formed singletons. Lancet 1989; 2:345.
  9. Mangesi L, Hofmeyr GJ. Fetal movement counting for assessment of fetal wellbeing. Cochrane Database Syst Rev 2007; :CD004909.
  10. Freeman RK, Anderson G, Dorchester W. A prospective multi-institutional study of antepartum fetal heart rate monitoring. II. Contraction stress test versus nonstress test for primary surveillance. Am J Obstet Gynecol 1982; 143:778.
  11. ACOG practice bulletin. Antepartum fetal surveillance. Number 9, October 1999 (replaces Technical Bulletin Number 188, January 1994). Clinical management guidelines for obstetrician-gynecologists. Int J Gynaecol Obstet 2000; 68:175.
  12. Braly P, Freeman RK. The significance of fetal heart rate reactivity with a positive oxytocin challenge test. Obstet Gynecol 1977; 50:689.
  13. Evertson LR, Gauthier RJ, Schifrin BS, Paul RH. Antepartum fetal heart rate testing. I. Evolution of the nonstress test. Am J Obstet Gynecol 1979; 133:29.
  14. Freeman RK, Anderson G, Dorchester W. A prospective multi-institutional study of antepartum fetal heart rate monitoring. I. Risk of perinatal mortality and morbidity according to antepartum fetal heart rate test results. Am J Obstet Gynecol 1982; 143:771.
  15. Rochard F, Schifrin BS, Goupil F, et al. Nonstressed fetal heart rate monitoring in the antepartum period. Am J Obstet Gynecol 1976; 126:699.
  16. Magann EF, Chauhan SP, Barrilleaux PS, et al. Amniotic fluid index and single deepest pocket: weak indicators of abnormal amniotic volumes. Obstet Gynecol 2000; 96:737.
  17. Manning FA, Platt LD, Sipos L. Antepartum fetal evaluation: development of a fetal biophysical profile. Am J Obstet Gynecol 1980; 136:787.
  18. Manning FA, Snijders R, Harman CR, et al. Fetal biophysical profile score. VI. Correlation with antepartum umbilical venous fetal pH. Am J Obstet Gynecol 1993; 169:755.
  19. Manning FA, Morrison I, Harman CR, et al. Fetal assessment based on fetal biophysical profile scoring: experience in 19,221 referred high-risk pregnancies. II. An analysis of false-negative fetal deaths. Am J Obstet Gynecol 1987; 157:880.
  20. Nageotte MP, Towers CV, Asrat T, Freeman RK. Perinatal outcome with the modified biophysical profile. Am J Obstet Gynecol 1994; 170:1672.
  21. Miller DA, Rabello YA, Paul RH. The modified biophysical profile: antepartum testing in the 1990s. Am J Obstet Gynecol 1996; 174:812.
  22. Thompson RS, Trudinger BJ. Doppler waveform pulsatility index and resistance, pressure and flow in the umbilical placental circulation: an investigation using a mathematical model. Ultrasound Med Biol 1990; 16:449.
  23. al-Ghazali W, Chita SK, Chapman MG, Allan LD. Evidence of redistribution of cardiac output in asymmetrical growth retardation. Br J Obstet Gynaecol 1989; 96:697.
  24. Nicolaides KH, Bilardo CM, Soothill PW, Campbell S. Absence of end diastolic frequencies in umbilical artery: a sign of fetal hypoxia and acidosis. BMJ 1988; 297:1026.
  25. Weiner CP. The relationship between the umbilical artery systolic/diastolic ratio and umbilical blood gas measurements in specimens obtained by cordocentesis. Am J Obstet Gynecol 1990; 162:1198.
  26. Papageorghiou AT, Yu CK, Cicero S, et al. Second-trimester uterine artery Doppler screening in unselected populations: a review. J Matern Fetal Neonatal Med 2002; 12:78.
  27. Gudmundsson S, Korszun P, Olofsson P, Dubiel M. New score indicating placental vascular resistance. Acta Obstet Gynecol Scand 2003; 82:807.
  28. Hernandez-Andrade E, Brodszki J, Lingman G, et al. Uterine artery score and perinatal outcome. Ultrasound Obstet Gynecol 2002; 19:438.
  29. Soregaroli M, Valcamonico A, Scalvi L, et al. Late normalisation of uterine artery velocimetry in high risk pregnancy. Eur J Obstet Gynecol Reprod Biol 2001; 95:42.
  30. Gudmundsson S, Marsal K. Umbilical and uteroplacental blood flow velocity waveforms in pregnancies with fetal growth retardation. Eur J Obstet Gynecol Reprod Biol 1988; 27:187.
  31. Giles WB, Trudinger BJ, Baird PJ. Fetal umbilical artery flow velocity waveforms and placental resistance: pathological correlation. Br J Obstet Gynaecol 1985; 92:31.
  32. Karsdorp VH, van Vugt JM, van Geijn HP, et al. Clinical significance of absent or reversed end diastolic velocity waveforms in umbilical artery. Lancet 1994; 344:1664.
  33. Kontopoulos EV, Vintzileos AM. Condition-specific antepartum fetal testing. Am J Obstet Gynecol 2004; 191:1546.
  34. Alfirevic Z, Stampalija T, Gyte GM. Fetal and umbilical Doppler ultrasound in high-risk pregnancies. Cochrane Database Syst Rev 2013; 11:CD007529.
  35. Alfirevic Z, Stampalija T, Gyte GM. Fetal and umbilical Doppler ultrasound in normal pregnancy. Cochrane Database Syst Rev 2010; :CD001450.
  36. Picklesimer AH, Oepkes D, Moise KJ Jr, et al. Determinants of the middle cerebral artery peak systolic velocity in the human fetus. Am J Obstet Gynecol 2007; 197:526.e1.
  37. Mari G, Hanif F, Kruger M, et al. Middle cerebral artery peak systolic velocity: a new Doppler parameter in the assessment of growth-restricted fetuses. Ultrasound Obstet Gynecol 2007; 29:310.
  38. Johnson P, Stojilkovic T, Sarkar P. Middle cerebral artery Doppler in severe intrauterine growth restriction. Ultrasound Obstet Gynecol 2001; 17:416.
  39. Kiserud T, Eik-Nes SH, Blaas HG, et al. Ductus venosus blood velocity and the umbilical circulation in the seriously growth-retarded fetus. Ultrasound Obstet Gynecol 1994; 4:109.
  40. Baschat AA, Gembruch U, Reiss I, et al. Relationship between arterial and venous Doppler and perinatal outcome in fetal growth restriction. Ultrasound Obstet Gynecol 2000; 16:407.
  41. Kiserud T, Kessler J, Ebbing C, Rasmussen S. Ductus venosus shunting in growth-restricted fetuses and the effect of umbilical circulatory compromise. Ultrasound Obstet Gynecol 2006; 28:143.
  42. Dipietro JA, Irizarry RA, Hawkins M, et al. Cross-correlation of fetal cardiac and somatic activity as an indicator of antenatal neural development. Am J Obstet Gynecol 2001; 185:1421.
  43. DiPietro JA, Hodgson DM, Costigan KA, et al. Development of fetal movement--fetal heart rate coupling from 20 weeks through term. Early Hum Dev 1996; 44:139.
  44. Monk C, Sloan RP, Myers MM, et al. Fetal heart rate reactivity differs by women's psychiatric status: an early marker for developmental risk? J Am Acad Child Adolesc Psychiatry 2004; 43:283.
  45. Eswaran H, Preissl H, Wilson JD, et al. Short-term serial magnetoencephalography recordings offetal auditory evoked responses. Neurosci Lett 2002; 331:128.
  46. Holst M, Eswaran H, Lowery C, et al. Development of auditory evoked fields in human fetuses and newborns: a longitudinal MEG study. Clin Neurophysiol 2005; 116:1949.
  47. Pregnancy outcomes in the Diabetes Control and Complications Trial. Am J Obstet Gynecol 1996; 174:1343.
  48. Kjos SL, Leung A, Henry OA, et al. Antepartum surveillance in diabetic pregnancies: predictors of fetal distress in labor. Am J Obstet Gynecol 1995; 173:1532.
  49. Lagrew DC, Pircon RA, Towers CV, et al. Antepartum fetal surveillance in patients with diabetes: when to start? Am J Obstet Gynecol 1993; 168:1820.
  50. Dicker D, Feldberg D, Yeshaya A, et al. Fetal surveillance in insulin-dependent diabetic pregnancy: predictive value of the biophysical profile. Am J Obstet Gynecol 1988; 159:800.
  51. Landon MB, Vickers S. Fetal surveillance in pregnancy complicated by diabetes mellitus: is it necessary? J Matern Fetal Neonatal Med 2002; 12:413.
  52. Report of the National High Blood Pressure Education Program Working Group on High Blood Pressure in Pregnancy. Am J Obstet Gynecol 2000; 183:S1.
  53. Mulrow CD, Chiquette E, Ferrer RL, Sibai BM, Stevens KR, Harris M, et al. Management of chronic hypertension during pregnancy. Evid Rep Technol Assess (Summ) 2000; 1.
  54. American College of Obstetricians and Gynecologists, Task Force on Hypertension in Pregnancy. Hypertension in pregnancy. Report of the American College of Obstetricians and Gynecologists’ Task Force on Hypertension in Pregnancy. Obstet Gynecol 2013; 122:1122.
  55. Sibai BM, Barton JR. Expectant management of severe preeclampsia remote from term: patient selection, treatment, and delivery indications. Am J Obstet Gynecol 2007; 196:514.e1.
  56. Baschat AA, Weiner CP. Umbilical artery doppler screening for detection of the small fetus in need of antepartum surveillance. Am J Obstet Gynecol 2000; 182:154.
  57. Soothill PW, Ajayi RA, Campbell S, Nicolaides KH. Prediction of morbidity in small and normally grown fetuses by fetal heart rate variability, biophysical profile score and umbilical artery Doppler studies. Br J Obstet Gynaecol 1993; 100:742.
  58. Devoe LD, Azor H. Simultaneous nonstress fetal heart rate testing in twin pregnancy. Obstet Gynecol 1981; 58:450.
  59. Lodeiro JG, Vintzileos AM, Feinstein SJ, et al. Fetal biophysical profile in twin gestations. Obstet Gynecol 1986; 67:824.
  60. Devoe LD, Ware DJ. Antenatal assessment of twin gestation. Semin Perinatol 1995; 19:413.
  61. Chamberlain PF, Manning FA, Morrison I, et al. Ultrasound evaluation of amniotic fluid volume. I. The relationship of marginal and decreased amniotic fluid volumes to perinatal outcome. Am J Obstet Gynecol 1984; 150:245.
  62. Chamberlain PF, Manning FA, Morrison I, et al. Ultrasound evaluation of amniotic fluid volume. II. The relationship of increased amniotic fluid volume to perinatal outcome. Am J Obstet Gynecol 1984; 150:250.
  63. Ott WJ. Reevaluation of the relationship between amniotic fluid volume and perinatal outcome. Am J Obstet Gynecol 2005; 192:1803.
  64. Zhang J, Troendle J, Meikle S, et al. Isolated oligohydramnios is not associated with adverse perinatal outcomes. BJOG 2004; 111:220.
  65. Magann EF, Chauhan SP, Doherty DA, et al. A review of idiopathic hydramnios and pregnancy outcomes. Obstet Gynecol Surv 2007; 62:795.
  66. Lagrew DC, Pircon RA, Nageotte M, et al. How frequently should the amniotic fluid index be repeated? Am J Obstet Gynecol 1992; 167:1129.
  67. Golan A, Wolman I, Sagi J, et al. Persistence of polyhydramnios during pregnancy--its significance and correlation with maternal and fetal complications. Gynecol Obstet Invest 1994; 37:18.
  68. Harding JA, Jackson DM, Lewis DF, et al. Correlation of amniotic fluid index and nonstress test in patients with preterm premature rupture of membranes. Am J Obstet Gynecol 1991; 165:1088.
  69. Vintzileos AM, Bors-Koefoed R, Pelegano JF, et al. The use of fetal biophysical profile improves pregnancy outcome in premature rupture of the membranes. Am J Obstet Gynecol 1987; 157:236.
  70. Divon MY, Haglund B, Nisell H, et al. Fetal and neonatal mortality in the postterm pregnancy: the impact of gestational age and fetal growth restriction. Am J Obstet Gynecol 1998; 178:726.
  71. ACOG Committee on Practice Bulletins-Obstetrics. ACOG Practice Bulletin. Clinical management guidelines for obstetricians-gynecologists. Number 55, September 2004 (replaces practice pattern number 6, October 1997). Management of Postterm Pregnancy. Obstet Gynecol 2004; 104:639.
  72. Lam H, Leung WC, Lee CP, Lao TT. Amniotic fluid volume at 41 weeks and infant outcome. J Reprod Med 2006; 51:484.
  73. Morris JM, Thompson K, Smithey J, et al. The usefulness of ultrasound assessment of amniotic fluid in predicting adverse outcome in prolonged pregnancy: a prospective blinded observational study. BJOG 2003; 110:989.
  74. Clark SL, Sabey P, Jolley K. Nonstress testing with acoustic stimulation and amniotic fluid volume assessment: 5973 tests without unexpected fetal death. Am J Obstet Gynecol 1989; 160:694.
  75. Guidetti DA, Divon MY, Cavalieri RL, et al. Fetal umbilical artery flow velocimetry in postdate pregnancies. Am J Obstet Gynecol 1987; 157:1521.
  76. Reddy UM. Prediction and prevention of recurrent stillbirth. Obstet Gynecol 2007; 110:1151.
  77. Freeman RK, Dorchester W, Anderson G, Garite TJ. The significance of a previous stillbirth. Am J Obstet Gynecol 1985; 151:7.
  78. Weeks JW, Asrat T, Morgan MA, et al. Antepartum surveillance for a history of stillbirth: when to begin? Am J Obstet Gynecol 1995; 172:486.
  79. Sharma PP, Salihu HM, Kirby RS. Stillbirth recurrence in a population of relatively low-risk mothers. Paediatr Perinat Epidemiol 2007; 21 Suppl 1:24.
  80. Valentin L, Marsál K. Pregnancy outcome in women perceiving decreased fetal movement. Eur J Obstet Gynecol Reprod Biol 1987; 24:23.
  81. Mor-Yosef S, Sadovsky E, Brzezinski A, et al. Fetal movements and intrauterine growth retardation. Int J Gynaecol Obstet 1983; 21:315.
  82. Valentin L, Marsál K, Wahlgren L. Subjective recording of fetal movements. III. Screening of a pregnant population; the clinical significance of decreased fetal movement counts. Acta Obstet Gynecol Scand 1986; 65:753.
  83. Navot D, Yaffe H, Sadovsky E. Diagnosis of fetal jeopardy by assessment of fetal movement and heart rate accelerations. J Perinat Med 1983; 11:175.
  84. Harrington K, Thompson O, Jordan L, et al. Obstetric outcome in women who present with a reduction in fetal movements in the third trimester of pregnancy. J Perinat Med 1998; 26:77.
  85. American Academy of Pediatrics and the American College of Obstetricians and Gynecologists. Guidelines for perinatal care, 7th ed, 2012.
  86. Korszun P, Dubiel M, Kudla M, Gudmundsson S. Doppler velocimetry for predicting outcome of pregnancies with decreased fetal movements. Acta Obstet Gynecol Scand 2002; 81:926.
  87. Reddy UM, Ko CW, Willinger M. Maternal age and the risk of stillbirth throughout pregnancy in the United States. Am J Obstet Gynecol 2006; 195:764.
  88. Bai J, Wong FW, Bauman A, Mohsin M. Parity and pregnancy outcomes. Am J Obstet Gynecol 2002; 186:274.
  89. Aliyu MH, Salihu HM, Keith LG, et al. Extreme parity and the risk of stillbirth. Obstet Gynecol 2005; 106:446.
  90. Salihu HM, Dunlop AL, Hedayatzadeh M, et al. Extreme obesity and risk of stillbirth among black and white gravidas. Obstet Gynecol 2007; 110:552.
  91. Jackson RA, Gibson KA, Wu YW, Croughan MS. Perinatal outcomes in singletons following in vitro fertilization: a meta-analysis. Obstet Gynecol 2004; 103:551.
  92. Reddy UM, Laughon SK, Sun L, et al. Prepregnancy risk factors for antepartum stillbirth in the United States. Obstet Gynecol 2010; 116:1119.
  93. Alfirevic Z, Roberts D, Martlew V. How strong is the association between maternal thrombophilia and adverse pregnancy outcome? A systematic review. Eur J Obstet Gynecol Reprod Biol 2002; 101:6.
  94. Dugoff L, Hobbins JC, Malone FD, et al. First-trimester maternal serum PAPP-A and free-beta subunit human chorionic gonadotropin concentrations and nuchal translucency are associated with obstetric complications: a population-based screening study (the FASTER Trial). Am J Obstet Gynecol 2004; 191:1446.
  95. Dugoff L, Hobbins JC, Malone FD, et al. Quad screen as a predictor of adverse pregnancy outcome. Obstet Gynecol 2005; 106:260.
  96. Mathews TJ, MacDorman MF. Infant mortality statistics from the 2004 period linked birth/infant death data set. Natl Vital Stat Rep 2007; 55:1.