SONOGRAPHIC BIOPHYSICAL PROFILE IN DETECTION OF FOETAL HYPOXIA IN 100 CASES OF SUSPECTED HIGH RISK PREGNANCY

Authors

  • Nadeem Ullah
  • Muhammad Usman
  • Abdur Rehman Khan

Abstract

Background: The foetus has become increasingly accessible and visible as a patient over the last twodecades. Ultrasound imaging has broadened the scope of foetal assessment. Dynamic real time B-Modeultrasound is used to monitor cluster of biophysical variables, both dynamic and static collectivelytermed as biophysical profile. The purpose of this study was to determine the effect of sonographicbiophysical profile score on perinatal outcome in terms of mortality and morbidity. Methods: Thisdescriptive study was carried on 100 randomly selected high risk pregnant patients in RadiologyDepartment PGMI, Government Lady Reading Hospital, Peshawar from December 2007 to June 2008.Manning biophysical profile including non-stress was employed for foetal screening, using Toshibaultrasound machine model Nemio SSA-550A and 7.5 MHZ probe. Results: Out of 100 cases 79 (79%)had a normal biophysical profile in the last scan of 10/10 and had a normal perinatal outcome with 5minutes Apgar score >7/10. In 13 (13%) cases Apgar score at 5 minute was < 7/10 and babies wereshifted to nursery. There were 2 (2%) false positive cases that showed abnormal biophysical profilescores of 6/10 but babies were born with an Apgar score of 8/10 at 5 minutes. There were 2 (2%)neonatal deaths in this study group. The sensitivity of biophysical profile was 79.1%, specificity 92.9%.Predictive value for a positive test was 98.55%; predictive value for a negative test was 41.93%.Conclusion: Biophysical profile is highly accurate and reliable test of diagnosing foetal hypoxia.Keywords: Foetal biophysical profile, High risk pregnancy, Perinatal outcome

References

Afzal A, Nasreen K. Biophysical Score; high risk pregnancy.

Prof Med J 2006; 13:362–9.

William D, Alfred B, Barbra S. Fetal growth and well being

in: The Requisites ultrasound. 2nd ed. China, Mosby

;330–41.

Filho GHA, Araujo E, Nardozza LM, Costa DLL, Moron AF,

Mattar R. Ultrasound assessment of the fetal biophysical

profile: what does a radiologist need to know? Eur J Radiol

;66:122–6.

MC Grath, Ling M. Fetal well – being and fetal death in:

Clinical Sonography, 4thed. Philadelphia: Roger C Sanders;

p.173–82.

Sergent F , Lefevre A , Verspyck E , Marpeau L. Decreased

fetal movements in the third trimester: what to do? Gynecol

Obstet Fertil 2006;34:874–6.

Bachat AA, Galan HL, Bhide A, Berq C, Kush ML, Oepkes

D, et al. Doppler and Biophysical assessment in growth

restricted fetuses. Ultrasound Obstet Gynecol 2006;27:41–7.

Manning FA, Bondaji N, Harman CR, Casiro O,

Menticoglou S, Morrison I, et al. Fetal assessment by fetal

biophysical profile score. The incidence of cerebral palsy

among tested and untested perinates. Am J Obstet Gynecol

;76:36.

Mirghani HM, Weerasinghe DS, Ezimokhai M, Smith JR.

The effect of maternal fasting on the fetal biophysical

profile. Int J Gynecol Obstet 2003;81:17–21.

Arauz RJF, Chequer MJC, Lopez AAG, Hernandez JVH,

Mendez AJA. Usefulness of Biophysical profile in preterm

rupture of membranes with treatment. Gynecol Obstet Mex

;73:415–23.

Sacks HS, Chalmers TC, Smith H. Sensitivity and specificity

of clinical trials: Randomized versus historical controls. Arch

Intern Med 1983;143:753–5.

Dayal AK, Manning FA, Berck DJ, Mussalli GM, Avila C,

Harman CR, et al. Fetal death after normal biophysical

profile score: An eighteen year experience. Am J Obstet

Gynecol 1999;181:1231–6.

Bhutta ZA. Priorities in newborn care and development of

clinical neonatology in Pakistan: where to know? J Coll

Physicians Surg Pak 1997;7:231–4.

Soothill PW, Ajayi RA, Cambel P, Nicolaides KH.

Prediction of mortality in small and normal grown fetuses by

fetal heart rate and variability, biophysical score and

umbilical artery Doppler studies. Br J Obstet Gynaecol

;100:742–5.

Begum F, Buckshee K, Pande JN. Antenatal assessment

using biophysical profile score. Bangladesh Med Res Counc

Bull 1996;22(2):51–9.

Nashvill, TN, Shah DM, Brown JE, Salyer SL, Fleischer AC,

Boehm FH. A modified scheme for biophysical profile

scoring. Department of Obstetric and Gynaecology,

Vanderbilt University School of Medicine. Am J Obstet

Gynecol 1989;160:586–91.

Mahmood G, Tasnim N, Qazi A. Admission biophysical

profile. A better predictor of perinatal out come. Mother and

Child Health Centre, Pakistan Institute of Medical Sciences

Islamabad. J Surg Pak 2000;16:6–11.

Downloads

Published

2010-09-01