Assessment of High-Risk Pregnancies using Biophysical Profile: Assessment of High-Risk Pregnancies using Biophysical Profile

Niha  Dilnawaz; Akash John; Abid  Ali; Naweera  Ahmed; Aiman  Zafar

doi:10.54393/pjhs.v3i01.49

Authors

Niha Dilnawaz University Institute of Radiological and Medical Imaging Sciences University of Lahore, Gujrat Campus
Akash John University Institute of Radiological and Medical Imaging Sciences, University of Lahore, Gujrat Campus
Abid Ali Department of Allied Health Sciences, University of Lahore, Gujrat Campus
Naweera Ahmed University Institute of Radiological and Medical Imaging Sciences University of Lahore, Gujrat Campus
Aiman Zafar University Institute of Radiological and Medical Imaging Sciences University of Lahore, Gujrat Campus

DOI:

https://doi.org/10.54393/pjhs.v3i01.49

Keywords:

Biophysical profile (BPP), non-stress test (NST), intra-uterine growth restriction (IUGR).

Abstract

The purpose of the current study was to know the importance of using BPP for primary fetal surveillance in predicting fetal outcome. Methods: A total of 70 individuals with high risk pregnancies were included from 16-45 years examined through ultrasound and Doppler (Toshiba Xario 100 colour Doppler (C5-2 convex probe) having a real-time frequency range of 3.0 to 5.0 MHZ) at a private hospital in Gujranwala from October 2021 to March 2022. A Convenient sampling approach was used to collect data through informed consent forms. Data was collected using SPSS 21. Results: The current study included 70 patients who were examined using Doppler for fetal well-being. Study concluded to have correlation between age groups and development of fetal anomalies of age group 16-25years 44(62.9%), 26-35 years 21(30.0%), 36-45 years (7.1%). Most of the females in gestational weeks 34-37 weeks. Frequency of high-risk pregnancy most common is hypertension 25(35.7%) followed by other such as low fetal movement 10(14.3%), oligohydramnios 8(11.4%) and the least common is diabetes mellitus. Reactive 50(71.4%), and non-reactive 20(28.6%). Result shows the frequency of biophysical profile score in total number of patients included. Biophysical profile score 0-2 in 16(22.9%), 4-6 BPP score in 42(66%) and 8-10 BPP in 12(17.1%) patients. The frequency of IUGR in relation to biophysical profile score showing 18(72.0%), in 0-2 BPP score and 7(28%) in 4-6 BPP score. Conclusions: Normal BPP assures good fetal status and perinatal outcome. Abnormal BPP indicates that the fetus may be compromised. The study concluded that BPP has significant role in predicting fetal outcome.

References

Betrán AP, Temmerman M, Kingdon C, Mohiddin A, Opiyo N, Torloni MR, et al. Interventions to reduce unnecessary caesarean sections in healthy women and babies. Lancet. 2018 Oct 13;392(10155):1358-1368. doi: 10.1016/S0140-6736(18)31927-5.

Palmer WL, Bottle A, Aylin P. Association between day of delivery and obstetric outcomes: observational study. BMJ. 2015 Nov 24;351:h5774. doi: 10.1136/bmj.h5774.

Mylonas I, Friese K. Indications for and risks of elective cesarean section. Deutsches Ärzteblatt International. 2015 Jul;112(29-30):489. -95. doi: 10.3238/arztebl.2015.0489.

Lee S, Ayers S, Holden D. Risk perception of women during high risk pregnancy: a systematic review. Health, risk & society. 2012;14(6):511-531.

English FA, Kenny LC, McCarthy FP. Risk factors and effective management of preeclampsia. Integrated Blood Pressure Control. 2015 Mar 3;8:7-12. doi: 10.2147/IBPC.S50641

Osungbade KO, Ige OK. Public health perspectives of preeclampsia in developing countries: implication for health system strengthening. Journal of Pregnancy. 2011;2011:481095. doi: 10.1155/2011/481095.

Redman CW. Hypertension in pregnancy: the NICE guidelines. Heart. 2011 Dec;97(23):1967-9. doi: 10.1136/heartjnl-2011-300949.

August P, Sibai BM. Preeclampsia: Clinical features and diagnosis. Post TW, UpToDate. Waltham, MA: UpToDate. 2017 Dec.

Bayou G, Berhan Y. Perinatal mortality and associated risk factors: a case control study. Ethiopian journal of health sciences. 2012;22(3).

Beck S, Wojdyla D, Say L, Betran AP, Merialdi M, Requejo JH, et al. The worldwide incidence of preterm birth: a systematic review of maternal mortality and morbidity. Bull World Health Organ. 2010 Jan;88(1):31-8. doi: 10.2471/BLT.08.062554.

knoema. Pakistan - Infant mortality rate. 2020.

Pervez A, Chaudhry NA, Chaudhry FM, Ashfaq M. A survey of infant and under-5 mortality in Faisalabad Tehsil. JPMA. The Journal of the Pakistan Medical Association. 1991 Oct 1;41(10):244-5.

Rasmussen S, Irgens LM. History of fetal growth restriction is more strongly associated with severe rather than milder pregnancy-induced hypertension. Hypertension. 2008 Apr;51(4):1231-8. doi: 10.1161/hypertensionaha.107.096248.

Lykke JA, Langhoff-Roos J, Sibai BM, Funai EF, Triche EW, Paidas MJ. Hypertensive pregnancy disorders and subsequent cardiovascular morbidity and type 2 diabetes mellitus in the mother. Hypertension. 2009 Jun;53(6):944-51. doi: 10.1161/hypertensionaha.109.130765.

Anupama MS, Dwarakanath L, Anand S. Comparative study of rapid biophysical profile and conventional biophysical profile in predicting perinatal outcome in high risk pregnancies. Age (Years).25(34):56.7. 2009 Jun;53(6):944-51. doi: 10.1161/hypertensionaha.109.130765.

Baschat AA, Gembruch U, Harman CR. The sequence of changes in Doppler and biophysical parameters as severe fetal growth restriction worsens. Ultrasound in Obstetrics and Gynecology 2001 Dec;18(6):571-7. doi: 10.1046/j.0960-7692.2001.00591.x.

Manegold G, Tercanli S, Struben H, Huang D, Kang A. Is a routine ultrasound in the third trimester justified?–Additional fetal anomalies diagnosed after two previous unremarkable Ultrasound examinations. Ultraschall in der Medizin-European Journal of Ultrasound. 2011 Aug;32(04):381-386. doi: 10.1055/s-0029-1245799

Bogin B. Patterns of human growth. Cambridge University Press; 2020 Nov 19.

Hassan SI, Gouda AMI, El-Monshed A, Kandeel HAM. Effect of cognitive behavioral therapy on anxiety, stress, depression, and coping pattern among pregnant women with preeclampsia. American Journal of Nursing. 2020;8(2):269-277.

Lohana RU, Khatri M, Hariharan C. Correlation of non stress test with fetal outcome in term pregnancy (37-42 Weeks). International Journal of Reproduction, Contraception, Obstetrics and Gynecology. 2013;2(4):639-646.doi.org/10.5455/2320-1770.ijrcog20131229

Sapoval J, Singh V, Carter RE. Ultrasound Biophysical Profile. 2019.

Gruslin A, Lemyre B. Pre-eclampsia: fetal assessment and neonatal outcomes. Best practice & research Clinical obstetrics & gynaecology. 2011;25(4):491-507. doi.org/10.1016/j.bpobgyn.2011.02.004

Shaikh AB, Chidre YV. Comparison of the biophysical profile and modified biophysical profile in prediction of the fetal outcome in pregnancy induced hypertension. International Journal of Reproduction, Contraception, Obstetrics and Gynecology. 2017;6(4):1206-11.doi.org/10.18203/2320-1770.ijrcog20170935

Payne BA, Kyle PM, Lim K, Lisonkova S, Magee LA, Pullar B, et al. An assessment of predictive value of the biophysical profile in women with preeclampsia using data from the fullPIERS database. Pregnancy Hypertension: An International Journal of Women's Cardiovascular Health. 2013;3(3):166-71. doi.org/10.1016/j.preghy.2013.03.001

Sowmya K. Modified biophysical profile in antepartum fetal surveillance of high risk pregnancies: Rajiv Gandhi University Of Health Sciences, Karnataka, Bangalore; 2010.