Hostname: page-component-7bb8b95d7b-cx56b Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-09-05T18:28:42.113Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

Use of the Vasoflo-3 for continuous-wave Doppler ultrasound measurements in pregnancy

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  10 October 2008

John AD Spencer
John AD Spencer*
Affiliation:
Institute of Obstetrics and Gynaecology, Royal Postgraduate Medical School, London, UK.
*
Dr JAD Spencer, Senior Lecturer, Institute of Obstetrics and Gynaecology, Royal Postgraduate Medical School, University of London, Queen Charlotte's and Chelsea Hospital, Goldhawk Road, Chiswick, London W6 OXG, UK.
Get access Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Extract

The established technique of investigating peripheral arteries by continuous-wave Doppler ultrasound was first applied to obstetrics by FitzGerald and Drumm in 1977. Since that time, each year has seen an increasing number of reports regarding obstetric Doppler, but assessment of its true value in pregnancy management, by large prospective randomized trials, is still awaited. Continuous-wave Doppler ultrasound is a relatively simple and inexpensive technique, ideal for screening the uterine and umbilical arterial circulations without the necessity for concurrent ultrasound imaging. However, difficulties in interpretation and analysis of the displayed Doppler-shifted frequencies, as well as the limited number of reports on the performance characteristics of Doppler ultrasound instruments, may well have contributed to the slowness with which the technique has been taken up for study. Continuous-wave Doppler systems designed for obstetric use have recently become available and the Vasoflo-3 (Oxford Sonicaid, Chichester, Sussex) has a microprocessor which makes the instrument very versatile. I shall review the technique of continuous-wave Doppler ultrasound measurement in obstetrics, with particular reference to measurement variation, in the light of our experience with the Vasoflo-3 (Figure 1). I shall then briefly summarize a few of the reports which have used continuous-wave Doppler ultrasound in obstetrics.

Type
Equipment Evaluation
Information
Fetal and Maternal Medicine Review , Volume 1 , Issue 1 , January 1989 , pp. 105 - 110
Copyright
Copyright © Cambridge University Press 1989

Access options

Get access to the full version of this content by using one of the access options below. (Log in options will check for institutional or personal access. Content may require purchase if you do not have access.)

References

1Fitzgerald, DE, Drumm, JE.Noninvasive measurement of human fetal circulation using ultrasound: a new method. Br Med J 1977; 2: 1450–51.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
2Pearce, JM, McParland, P.Doppler uteroplacental waveforms. Lancet 1988; 2: 1287.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
3Campbell, S, Vyas, S, Bewley, S.Doppler uteroplacental waveforms. Lancet 1988; 2: 1287–88.Google Scholar
4Fairlie, F, Walker, JJ, Mathers, AM, Cameron, AD.Doppler uteroplacental waveforms. Lancet 1988; 2: 1288.Google Scholar
5Hanretty, KP, Whittle, MJ, Rubin, PC.Doppler uteroplacental waveforms in pregnancy-induced hypertension: a reappraisal. Lancet 1988; 2: 850–52.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
6Price, J, Spencer, JAD. Variability of ‘on-line’ calculation of Doppler waveform indices of uterine vessels in pregnancy. Unpublished observations. Presented to the British Medical Ultrasound Society, Brighton, December 1987.Google Scholar
7Price, J, Spencer, JAD. The effects of change in maternal posture on uterine blood flow. Unpublished observations. Presented to the Blair Bell Research Society, Leeds, May 1988.Google Scholar
8Long, MG, Price, M, Spencer, JAD.Uteroplacental perfusion after epidural analgesia for elective caesarean section. Br J Obstet Gynaecol 1988; 95: 1081–82CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
9Pearce, JM. Uteroplacental and fetal blood flow. In: Whittle, MJ ed, Bailliere's clinical obstetrics and gynaecology. London: Bailliere Tindall, 1987: 157–84.Google Scholar
10van Eyck, J, Wladimiroff, JW, van den Wijngaard, JAGW, Noordam, MJ, Prechtl, HFR.The blood flow velocity waveform in the fetal internal carotid and umbilical artery; its relation to fetal behavioural states in normal pregnancy at 37–38 weeks. Br J Obstet Gynaecol 1987; 94: 736–41.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
11Spencer, JAD, Price, J. Intraobserver variation in Doppler ultrasound indices of placental perfusion derived from different numbers of waveforms. J Ultrasound Med In press.Google Scholar
12Schulman, H, Fleischer, A, Stern, W, Farmakides, G, Jagani, N, Blattner, P.Umbilical velocity wave ratios in human pregnancy. Am J Obstet Gynecol 1984; 148: 958–90.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
13Murrills, AJ, Gorman, F, Bamford, PN, Gazzard, VM, Keen, AC. Reproducibility in umbilical artery blood velocity waveforms. In: Sheldon, CD, Evan, DH, Salvage, JR eds, Obstetric and neonatal blood flow. London: Biological Engineering Society, Royal College of Surgeons, 1987; 41–46.Google Scholar
14Trudinger, BJ, Giles, WB, Cook, CM.Flow velocity waveforms in the maternal uteroplacental and fetal placental circulations. Am J Obstet Gynecol 1985; 152: 155–63.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
15Campbell, S, Pearce, JMF, Hackett, G, Cohen-Overbeek, T, Hernandez, C.Qualitative assessment of utero-placental blood flow: early screening test for high-risk pregnancies. Obstet Gynecol 1986; 68: 649–53.Google Scholar
16Arduini, D, Rizzo, G, Romanini, C, Mancuso, S.Uteroplacental blood flow velocity waveforms as predictors of pregnancy-induced hypertension. Eur J Obstet Gynecol Reprod Biol 1987; 26: 335–41.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
17Steel, SA, Pearce, JM, Chamberlain, GV.Doppler ultrasound of the uteroplacental circulation as a screening test for severe preeclampsia with intrauterine growth retardation. Eur J Obstet Gynecol Reprod Biol 1988; 28: 279–87.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
18Reuwer, PJHM, Bruinse, HW, Stoutenbeek, P, Haspels, AA.Doppler assessment of the fetoplacental circulation in normal and growth-retarded fetuses. Eur J Obstet Gynecol Reprod Biol 1984; 18: 199–205.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
19Fleischer, A, Schulman, H, Farmakides, G, Bracero, L, Blattner, P, Randolph, G.Umbilical artery velocity waveforms and intrauterine growth retardation. Am J Obstet Gynecol 1985; 151: 502–505.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
20Reuwer, PJHM, Rietman, GW, Sijmons, EA, van Tiel, MWM, Bruinse, HW.Intrauterine growth retardation: prediction of perinatal distress by Doppler ultrasound. Lancet 1987; 2: 415–18.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
21Rochelson, BL, Schulman, H, Fleischer, A et al. The clinical significance of Doppler umbilical artery velocimetry in the small for gestational age fetus. Am J Obstet Gynecol 1987; 156: 1223–26.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
22Trudinger, BJ, Giles, WB, Cook, CM, Connelly, A, Thompson, RS.Umbilical artery flow velocity waveforms in high-risk pregnancy. Randomised controlled trial. Lancet 1987; 1: 188–90CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
23Pearce, JM. Doppler ultrasound blood velocity waveforms. In: Spencer, JAD ed, Fetal monitoring. Tunbridge Wells: Castle House Publications, 1989: In press.Google Scholar