morphological sonography Archives - Revista Brasileira de Ginecologia e Obstetrícia

  • Original Articles

    Accuracy of Prenatal Diagnosis of Congenital Cardiac Malformations

    Revista Brasileira de Ginecologia e Obstetrícia. 2019;41(1):11-16

    Summary

    Original Articles

    Accuracy of Prenatal Diagnosis of Congenital Cardiac Malformations

    Revista Brasileira de Ginecologia e Obstetrícia. 2019;41(1):11-16

    DOI 10.1055/s-0038-1676058

    Views6

    Abstract

    Objective

    To evaluate the accuracy of the diagnosis of fetal heart diseases obtained through ultrasound examinations performed during the prenatal period compared with the postnatal evaluation.

    Methods

    A retrospective cohort study with 96 pregnant women who were attended at the Echocardiography Service and whose deliveries occurred at the Complexo Hospitalar Santa Casa de Porto Alegre, in the state of Rio Grande do Sul, Brazil. Risk factor assessment plus sensitivity and specificity analysis were used, comparing the accuracy of the screening for congenital heart disease by means of obstetrical ultrasound and morphological evaluation and fetal echocardiography, considering p < 0.05 as significant. The present study was approved by the Research Ethics Committee of the Institution.

    Results

    The analysis of risk factors shows that 31.3% of the fetuses with congenital heart disease could be identified by anamnesis. The antepartum echocardiography demonstrated a sensitivity of 97.7%, a specificity of 88.9%, and accuracy of 93% in the diagnosis of congenital heart disease. A sensitivity of 29.3% was found for the obstetric ultrasound, of 54.3% for themorphological ultrasound, and of 97.7% for the fetal echocardiography. The fetal echocardiography detected fetal heart disease in 67.7% of the cases, the morphological ultrasound in 16.7%, and the obstetric ultrasound in 11.5% of the cases.

    Conclusion

    There is a high proportion of congenital heart disease in pregnancies with no risk factors for this outcome. Faced with the disappointing results of obstetric ultrasound for the detection of congenital heart diseases and the current unfeasibility of universal screening of congenital heart diseases through fetal echocardiography, the importance of the fetal morphological ultrasound and its performance by qualified professionals is reinforced for a more appropriate management of these pregnancies.

    See more

Search

Search in:

Article type
abstract
book-review
brief-report
case-report
case-report -
correction
editorial
editorial -
letter
letter -
other
other -
rapid-communication
research-article
research-article -
review-article
review-article -
Section
Arigos Originais
Artigo de Revisão
Original Articles
Carta ao Editor
Carta ao Editor
Cartas
Case Report
Case Reports
Caso e Tratamento
Clinical Consensus Recommendation
Corrigendum
Editoriais
Editorial
Editorial
Equipamentos e Métodos
Errata
Erratas
Erratum
Febrasgo Position Statement
Febrasgo Statement
Febrasgo Statement Position
FIGO Statement
Integrative Review
Letter to Editor
Letter to Editor
Letter to the Editor
Letter to the Editor
Métodos e Técnicas
Nota do Editor
Nota Prévia
Original Article
Original Article/Contraception
Original Article/Infertility
Original Article/Obstetrics
Original Article/Oncology
Original Article/Sexual Violence/Pediatric and Adolescent Gynecology
Original Article/Teaching and Training
Original Articles
Original Articles
Relato de Caso
Relato de Casos
Relatos de Casos
Reply to the Letter to the Editor
Resposta dos Autores
Resumo De Tese
Resumo De Tese
Resumos de Tese
Resumos de Tese
Resumos de Teses
Resumos de Teses
Resumos dos Trabalhos Premiados no 50º Congresso Brasileiro de Ginecologia e Obstetrícia
Review
Review Article
Review Articles
Revisão
Revisão
Short Communication
Special Article
Systematic Review
Técnica e Equipamentos
Técnicas e Equipamentos
Técnicas e Métodos
Trabalhos Originais
Year / Volume
2024; v.46
2023; v.45
2022; v.44
2021; v.43
2020; v.42
2019; v.41
2018; v.40
2017; v.39
2016; v.38
2015; v.37
2014; v.36
2013; v.35
2012; v.34
2011; v.33
2010; v.32
2009; v.31
2008; v.30
2007; v.29
2006; v.28
2005; v.27
2004; v.26
2003; v.25
2002; v.24
2001; v.23
2000; v.22
1999; v.21
1998; v.20
ISSUE