Back

The Relationship of Antepartum Fetal Heart Rate Patterns to Adverse Pregnancy Outcomes

Davis Jones, G.; Cooke, W.; Albert, B.; Vatish, M.

2024-11-18 obstetrics and gynecology
10.1101/2024.11.16.24317432 medRxiv
Show abstract

IntroductionAntepartum fetal heart rate (FHR) patterns are routinely assessed to evaluate fetal wellbeing. Despite their clinical use, the relationship between specific FHR patterns and adverse pregnancy outcomes (APOs) remains unclear. This study aims to investigate the association between antepartum FHR patterns and APOs to improve fetal risk assessment. MethodsIn this retrospective case-control study, we extracted raw antepartum FHR traces from singleton pregnancies between 27+0 and 41+6 weeks gestation recorded at Oxford University Hospitals from January 1991 to February 2024. Adverse outcomes included acidaemia, stillbirth, asphyxia, extended neonatal care unit (NCU) admission, hypoxic-ischaemic encephalopathy (HIE), low Apgar scores and neonatal resuscitation at delivery. After applying inclusion and exclusion criteria, 938 FHR traces with APOs were matched using propensity score matching with 938 traces from normal pregnancy outcomes (NPOs), controlling for gestational age, fetal sex, maternal BMI, maternal age, parity, and trace duration. FHR patterns were extracted using a validated automated algorithm and analysed statistically. ResultsThe APO cohort showed significantly higher basal heart rates (BHR), fewer accelerations, more decelerations, lower short-term variability (STV), and spent a greater proportion of the trace in periods of low variation compared to the NPO cohort (p < 0.001). Logistic regression identified prolonged periods of low variation (odds ratio [OR] = 1.92, 95% CI 1.60-2.30, p < 0.001), increased decelerations (OR = 1.40, 95% CI 1.22-1.60, p < 0.001), reduced accelerations (OR = 0.66, 95% CI 0.55-0.78, p < 0.001), elevated BHR (OR = 0.70, 95% CI 0.61-0.80, p < 0.001), and decreased STV (OR = 0.72, 95% CI 0.57-0.91, p = 0.006) as significant predictors of APOs. ConclusionsSpecific antepartum FHR patterns are significantly associated with adverse pregnancy outcomes. Detailed analysis of these patterns can enhance fetal risk assessment and inform clinical decision-making. Adoption of standardised interpretation criteria for antepartum FHR monitoring may improve perinatal outcomes.

Matching journals

The top 4 journals account for 50% of the predicted probability mass.

1
BMC Pregnancy and Childbirth
20 papers in training set
Top 0.1%
28.8%
2
PLOS ONE
4510 papers in training set
Top 21%
8.8%
3
Human Reproduction
18 papers in training set
Top 0.1%
7.5%
4
Scientific Reports
3102 papers in training set
Top 11%
7.5%
50% of probability mass above
5
Journal of the American Heart Association
119 papers in training set
Top 0.9%
7.1%
6
BMJ Open
554 papers in training set
Top 4%
5.0%
7
Journal of Clinical Pathology
12 papers in training set
Top 0.1%
2.0%
8
BMC Medicine
163 papers in training set
Top 3%
2.0%
9
The Lancet Digital Health
25 papers in training set
Top 0.3%
1.8%
10
BMJ
49 papers in training set
Top 0.5%
1.7%
11
The Journal of Clinical Endocrinology & Metabolism
35 papers in training set
Top 0.7%
1.7%
12
Journal of Biomedical Informatics
45 papers in training set
Top 0.8%
1.7%
13
Journal of the American Medical Informatics Association
61 papers in training set
Top 1%
1.7%
14
Frontiers in Public Health
140 papers in training set
Top 5%
1.5%
15
JAMA Network Open
127 papers in training set
Top 3%
1.4%
16
Journal of Clinical Medicine
91 papers in training set
Top 4%
1.3%
17
Journal of Clinical Investigation
164 papers in training set
Top 5%
0.9%
18
PLOS Medicine
98 papers in training set
Top 4%
0.8%
19
npj Digital Medicine
97 papers in training set
Top 3%
0.8%
20
Nature Communications
4913 papers in training set
Top 62%
0.8%
21
BMJ Open Quality
15 papers in training set
Top 0.8%
0.7%
22
JAMIA Open
37 papers in training set
Top 1%
0.7%
23
PeerJ
261 papers in training set
Top 17%
0.7%
24
Frontiers in Neuroscience
223 papers in training set
Top 8%
0.7%
25
Royal Society Open Science
193 papers in training set
Top 6%
0.5%
26
BMC Biology
248 papers in training set
Top 6%
0.5%