Association Between Iatrogenic Delivery for Suspected Fetal Growth Restriction and Childhood School Outcomes

Combined first-trimester screening for preterm small-for-gestational-age infants: Australian multicenter clinical feasibility study

OBJECTIVE

To assess the performance of the Fetal Medicine Foundation (FMF) first-trimester competing-risks screening model for small-for-gestational-age (SGA) fetuses requiring delivery at < 37 weeks' gestation, in a large cohort of women receiving maternity care in Australia.

METHODS

This was a retrospective analysis of prospectively collected data from a cohort of women attending one of two private multicenter fetal medicine practices for first-trimester screening for preterm pre-eclampsia (PE), defined as PE requiring delivery before 37 weeks' gestation. Risk for preterm SGA, defined as SGA requiring delivery before 37 weeks, was calculated but was not disclosed to the patient or referring physician. Screening data were matched to obstetric outcomes. The primary outcome was the efficacy of the FMF screening model in assessing the risk of preterm SGA. The potential effect on identifying other adverse pregnancy outcomes was also assessed.

RESULTS

During the study period, 22 841 women with a singleton pregnancy underwent combined first-trimester screening for preterm PE. These data were compared with those of 301 721 women in the state of Victoria with a singleton pregnancy who did not undergo screening during the study period. Calculation of the risk for preterm SGA identified 3030 (13.3%) pregnancies as high risk. The sensitivity of the model was 48.6% (95% CI, 41.0-56.2%), specificity was 87.0% (95% CI, 86.6-87.5%) and positive and negative predictive values were 2.9% (95% CI, 2.7-3.1%) and 99.5% (95% CI, 99.4-99.6%), respectively. Pregnancies at high risk for preterm SGA were also more likely to have preterm PE (risk ratio (RR), 2.28 (95% CI, 1.72-3.03)) and preterm birth (RR, 1.46 (95% CI, 1.32-1.63)), compared with unscreened pregnancies. Pregnancies at low risk for preterm SGA were less likely to result in a stillbirth (RR, 0.64 (95% CI, 0.47-0.86)) compared with unscreened pregnancies.

CONCLUSION

Combined first-trimester screening for preterm SGA shows moderate screening efficacy and therefore could help to inform pregnancy management and improve antenatal resource allocation. © 2025 International Society of Ultrasound in Obstetrics and Gynecology.

Effect of low-molecular-weight heparin on placenta-mediated fetal growth restriction in a tertiary referral hospital: A 7-year retrospective cohort study

OBJECTIVE

To investigate the effect of low-molecular-weight heparin (LMWH) on placenta-mediated fetal growth restriction (FGR).

METHODS

A cohort of 570 pregnant women diagnosed with placenta-mediated FGR were enrolled from January 1, 2015 through to December 31, 2021. A birth database, including demographic data, antenatal complications, and detailed delivery and newborn data, was created to collect variables from the Hospital Information System (HIS) Database. The unique personal registration number, assigned to each patient on first registration with HIS in the West China Second University Hospital, was used to link these patients. LMWH use was defined as at least 1-week prescription from diagnosis of placenta-mediated FGR. Pregnant women received LMWH (Enoxaparin 4000 IU/day) by self-administered subcutaneous injection only when they agreed and signed informed consent. Primary outcome was intrauterine fetal death after 20 weeks of pregnancy. Secondary outcomes included preterm birth (PB), Apgar score less than 7 at 1 min, admission to neonatal intensive care unit (NICU), and birth weight. Logistic regression analysis was conducted to compute adjusted odds ratio (aOR) with 95% confidence intervals (CI) for outcomes.

RESULTS

After controlling for confounders, LMWH use was associated with a decreased risk of intrauterine fetal death (aOR 2.49, 95% CI 1.35-4.57, P = 0.003), PB before 37 weeks of pregnancy (aOR 3.35, 95% CI 2.14-5.23, P < 0.001), PB before 34 weeks of pregnancy (aOR 2.25, 95% CI 1.36-3.74, P = 0.002), Apgar score less than 7 at 1 min (aOR 2.25, 95% CI 1.36-3.74, P = 0.002), NICU admission (aOR 2.29, 95% CI 1.48-3.55, P < 0.001). Using LMWH increased the mean birth weight in PB before 32 weeks of pregnancy (mean ± standard deviation [SD] 1126.4 ± 520.0 g, P = 0.020), PB before 37 weeks of pregnancy (mean ± SD 1563.9 ± 502.7 g, P = 0.019), early-onset FGR (mean ± SD 2125.2 ± 665.7 g, P < 0.001), late-onset FGR (mean ± SD 2343.4 ± 507.9, P < 0.001), and non-severe FGR (mean ± SD 2231.1 ± 607.2 g, P < 0.001).

CONCLUSION

Use of LMWH can significantly improve the fetal and neonatal outcomes among pregnant women with placenta-mediated FGR, particularly reducing the risk of intrauterine fetal death.

Directive clinique no 442 : Retard de croissance intra-utérin : Dépistage, diagnostic et prise en charge en contexte de grossesse monofœtale

OBJECTIF

Le retard de croissance intra-utérin est une complication obstétricale fréquente qui touche jusqu'à 10 % des grossesses dans la population générale et qui est le plus souvent due à une pathologie placentaire sous-jacente. L'objectif de la présente directive clinique est de fournir des déclarations sommaires et des recommandations pour appuyer un protocole clinique de dépistage, diagnostic et prise en charge du retard de croissance intra-utérin pour les grossesses à risque ou atteintes.

POPULATION CIBLE

Toutes les patientes enceintes menant une grossesse monofœtale. BéNéFICES, RISQUES ET COûTS: La mise en application des recommandations de la présente directive devrait améliorer la compétence des cliniciens quant à la détection du retard de croissance intra-utérin et à la réalisation des interventions indiquées. DONNéES PROBANTES: La littérature publiée a été colligée par des recherches effectuées jusqu'en septembre 2022 dans les bases de données PubMed, Medline, CINAHL et Cochrane Library en utilisant un vocabulaire contrôlé au moyen de termes MeSH pertinents (fetal growth retardation and small for gestational age) et de mots-clés (fetal growth, restriction, growth retardation, IUGR, FGR, low birth weight, small for gestational age, Doppler, placenta, pathology). Seuls les résultats de revues systématiques, d'essais cliniques randomisés ou comparatifs et d'études observationnelles ont été retenus. La littérature grise a été obtenue par des recherches menées dans des sites Web d'organismes s'intéressant à l'évaluation des technologies dans le domaine de la santé et d'organismes connexes, dans des collections de directives cliniques, des registres d'essais cliniques et des sites Web de sociétés de spécialité médicale nationales et internationales. MéTHODES DE VALIDATION: Les auteurs ont évalué la qualité des données probantes et la force des recommandations en utilisant le cadre méthodologique GRADE (Grading of Recommendations Assessment, Development and Evaluation). Voir l'annexe A en ligne (tableau A1 pour les définitions et tableau A2 pour l'interprétation des recommandations fortes et conditionnelles [faibles]). PROFESSIONNELS CONCERNéS: Obstétriciens, médecins de famille, infirmières, sages-femmes, spécialistes en médecine fœto-maternelle, radiologistes et autres professionnels de la santé qui prodiguent des soins aux patientes enceintes. RéSUMé POUR TWITTER: Mise à jour de la directive sur le dépistage, le diagnostic et la prise en charge du retard de croissance intra-utérin pour les grossesses à risque ou atteintes. DÉCLARATIONS SOMMAIRES: RECOMMANDATIONS: Prédiction du retard de croissance intra-utérin Prévention du retard de croissance intra-utérin Détection du retard de croissance intra-utérin Examens en cas de retard de croissance intra-utérin soupçonné Prise en charge du retard de croissance intra-utérin précoce Prise en charge du retard de croissance intra-utérin tardif Prise en charge du post-partum et consultations préconception.

Guideline No. 442: Fetal Growth Restriction: Screening, Diagnosis, and Management in Singleton Pregnancies

OBJECTIVE

Fetal growth restriction is a common obstetrical complication that affects up to 10% of pregnancies in the general population and is most commonly due to underlying placental diseases. The purpose of this guideline is to provide summary statements and recommendations to support a clinical framework for effective screening, diagnosis, and management of pregnancies that are either at risk of or affected by fetal growth restriction.

TARGET POPULATION

All pregnant patients with a singleton pregnancy.

BENEFITS, HARMS, AND COSTS

Implementation of the recommendations in this guideline should increase clinician competency to detect fetal growth restriction and provide appropriate interventions.

EVIDENCE

Published literature in English was retrieved through searches of PubMed or MEDLINE, CINAHL, and The Cochrane Library through to September 2022 using appropriate controlled vocabulary via MeSH terms (fetal growth retardation and small for gestational age) and key words (fetal growth, restriction, growth retardation, IUGR, FGR, low birth weight, small for gestational age, Doppler, placenta, pathology). Results were restricted to systematic reviews, randomized controlled trials/controlled clinical trials, and observational studies. Grey literature was identified through searching the websites of health technology assessment and health technology-related agencies, clinical practice guideline collections, clinical trial registries, and national and international medical specialty societies.

VALIDATION METHODS

The authors rated the quality of evidence and strength of recommendations using the Grading of Recommendations Assessment, Development and Evaluation (GRADE) approach. See online Appendix A (Table A1 for definitions and Table A2 for interpretations of strong and conditional [weak] recommendations).

INTENDED AUDIENCE

Obstetricians, family physicians, nurses, midwives, maternal-fetal medicine specialists, radiologists, and other health care providers who care for pregnant patients.

TWEETABLE ABSTRACT

Updated guidelines on screening, diagnosis, and management of pregnancies at risk of or affected by FGR.

SUMMARY STATEMENTS

RECOMMENDATIONS: Prediction of FGR Prevention of FGR Detection of FGR Investigations in Pregnancies with Suspected Fetal Growth Restriction Management of Early-Onset Fetal Growth Restriction Management of Late-Onset FGR Postpartum management and preconception counselling.

Elective induction of labour at full-term gestations and childhood school outcomes

AIM

To explore the association between induction of labour at full-term gestations in low-risk nulliparous women and childhood school outcomes.

METHODS

A retrospective whole-of-population cohort study linking perinatal data to educational test scores at grades 3, 5 and 7 in Victoria, Australia. Low-risk nulliparous women with singleton pregnancies induced at 39 and 40 weeks without a medical indication were compared to those expectantly managed from that week of gestation. Multivariable logistic regressions were used as well as generalised estimating equations on longitudinal data.

RESULTS

At 39 weeks, there were 3687 and 103 164 infants in the induction and expectant arms, respectively. At 40 weeks' gestation, there were 7914 and 70 280 infants, respectively. Infants born to nulliparous women induced at 39 weeks' gestation had significantly poorer educational outcomes at grade 3 (adjusted odds ratio (aOR) = 1.39, 95% confidence interval (CI): 1.13-1.70) but not grades 5 (aOR = 1.05, 95% CI: 0.84-1.33) and 7 (aOR = 1.07, 95% CI: 0.81-1.40) compared to those expectantly managed. Infants born to nulliparous women induced at 40 weeks had comparable educational outcomes at grade 3 (aOR = 1.06, 95% CI: 0.90-1.25) but poorer educational outcomes at grades 5 (aOR = 1.23, 95% CI: 1.05-1.43) and 7 (aOR = 1.23, 95% CI: 1.03-1.47) compared to those expectantly managed.

CONCLUSIONS

There were inconsistent associations between elective induction of labour at full-term gestations in low-risk nulliparous women and impaired childhood school outcomes.

The impact of small-for-gestational-age Status on the outcomes in very-Low-birth-weight (VLBW) premature infants: a prospective cohort study in Taiwan

Background

The impact of small-for-gestational-age (SGA) on very-low-birth-weight (VLBW) premature infants remains inconclusive. This study aimed to assess the effects of being born SGA status on the short-term and long-term outcomes in VLBW preterm infants.

Methods

We conducted a population-based, prospective cohort study on VLBW preterm infants born in Taiwan between 2012 and 2017. Sociodemographic, neonatal, growth and neurological data at 2 years of corrected age were collected. A total of 4243 VLBW infants born at 24 through 32 completed weeks' gestation participated in this study, of whom 1,005 had SGA status defined as a birth weight <10th percentile of gestation, and 3,238 did not (the non-SGA group).We compared the risks of short-term outcomes (neonatal mortality and morbidities), long-term outcomes (growth status, including weight, height, and head circumference <10th percentile, and neurodevelopmental impairments at 2 years of age). Subgroup analysis was performed by stratification of gestation age (GA): GA 24-26, 27-29 and 30-32 weeks.

Results

In the analysis of short-term outcomes, the SGA group had an increased risk of neonatal mortality [adjusted odds ratio (OR) = 2.66, 2.99, and 2.19, respectively] in all GA subgroups in comparison with the non-SGA group (p < 0.05). The SGA group had a significantly increased risk of bronchopulmonary dysplasia in GA 27-29 and 30-32 weeks (adjusted OR = 2.11 and 1.86, respectively). We also found that there was an increased risk of severe retinopathy of prematurity in GA 24-26 and 27-29 weeks in the SGA group compared with the non-SGA group (adjusted OR = 1.68 and 1.59, respectively).In the analysis of long-term outcomes, the SGA group had a significantly increased risk of NDI throughout all GA subgroups (adjusted = 1.94, 1.33, and 1.35, respectively) in comparison with the non-SGA group. The SGA groups also had an increased risk of growth status <10th percentile at 2 years of age (p < 0.05).

Conclusions

SGA VLBW premature infants had higher risks of neonatal death, growth status <10th percentile, and NDI at 2 years of corrected age compared with the non- SGA premature infants. Prenatal surveillance, postnatal attention, and long- term follow-up are warranted to improve the outcomes of VLBW SGA premature infants.

Management of late-onset fetal growth restriction: pragmatic approach

OBJECTIVES

There is limited prospective evidence to guide the management of late-onset fetal growth restriction (FGR) and its differentiation from small-for-gestational age. The aim of this study was to assess prospectively a novel protocol in which ultrasound criteria were used to classify women with suspected late FGR into two groups: those at low risk, who were managed expectantly until the anticipated date of delivery, and those at high risk, who were delivered soon after 37 weeks of gestation. We also compared the outcome of this prospective cohort with that of a historical cohort of women presenting similarly with suspected late FGR, in order to evaluate the impact of the new protocol.

METHODS

This was a prospective study of women with a non-anomalous singleton pregnancy at ≥ 32 weeks' gestation attending a tertiary hospital in London, UK, between February 2018 and September 2019, with estimated fetal weight (EFW) ≤ 10th centile, or EFW > 10th centile in addition to a decrease in fetal abdominal circumference of ≥ 50 centiles compared with a previous scan, umbilical artery Doppler pulsatility index > 95th centile or cerebroplacental ratio < 5th centile. Women were classified as low or high risk based on ultrasound and Doppler criteria. Women in the low-risk group were delivered by 41 weeks of gestation, unless they subsequently met high-risk criteria, whereas women in the high-risk group (EFW < 3rd centile, umbilical artery Doppler pulsatility index > 95th centile or EFW between 3rd and 10th centiles (inclusive) with abdominal circumference drop or abnormal Dopplers) were delivered at or soon after 37 weeks. The primary outcome was adverse neonatal outcome and included hypothermia, hypoglycemia, neonatal unit admission, jaundice requiring treatment, suspected infection, feeding difficulties, 1-min Apgar score < 7, hospital readmission and any severe adverse neonatal outcome (perinatal death, resuscitation using inotropes or mechanical ventilation, 5-min Apgar score < 7, metabolic acidosis, sepsis, and cerebral, cardiac or respiratory morbidity). Secondary outcomes were adverse maternal outcome (operative delivery for abnormal fetal heart rate) and severe adverse neonatal outcome. Women managed according to the new protocol were compared with a historical cohort of 323 women delivered prior to the implementation of the new protocol, for whom management was guided by individual clinician expertise.

RESULTS

Over 18 months, 321 women were recruited to the prospective cohort, of whom 156 were classified as low risk and 165 were high risk. Adverse neonatal outcome was significantly less common in the low-risk compared with the high-risk group (45% vs 58%; adjusted odds ratio (aOR), 0.6 (95% CI, 0.4-0.9); P = 0.022). There was no significant difference in the rate of adverse maternal outcome (18% vs 24%; aOR, 0.7 (95% CI, 0.4-1.2); P = 0.142) or severe adverse neonatal outcome (3.8% vs 8.5%; aOR, 0.5 (95% CI, 0.2-1.3); P = 0.153) between the low- and high-risk groups. Compared with women in the historical cohort classified retrospectively as low risk, low-risk women managed under the new protocol had a lower rate of adverse neonatal outcome (45% vs 58%; aOR, 0.6 (95% CI, 0.4-0.9); P = 0.026).

CONCLUSIONS

Appropriate risk stratification to guide management of late FGR was associated with a reduced rate of adverse neonatal outcome in low-risk pregnancies. In clinical practice, a policy of expectantly managing women with a low-risk late-onset FGR pregnancy at term could improve neonatal and long-term development. Randomized controlled trials are needed to assess the effect of an evidence-based conservative management protocol for late FGR on perinatal morbidity and mortality and long-term neurodevelopment. © 2023 The Authors. Ultrasound in Obstetrics & Gynecology published by John Wiley & Sons Ltd on behalf of International Society of Ultrasound in Obstetrics and Gynecology.

Association between antenatal diagnosis of late fetal growth restriction and educational outcomes in mid-childhood: A UK prospective cohort study with long-term data linkage study

BACKGROUND

Fetal growth restriction (FGR) is associated with a suboptimal intrauterine environment, which may adversely impact fetal neurodevelopment. However, analysing neurodevelopmental outcomes by observed birthweight fails to differentiate between true FGR and constitutionally small infants and cannot account for iatrogenic intervention. This study aimed to determine the relationship between antenatal FGR and mid-childhood (age 5 to 7 years) educational outcomes.

METHODS AND FINDINGS

The Pregnancy Outcome Prediction Study (2008-2012) was a prospective birth cohort conducted in a single maternity hospital in Cambridge, United Kingdom. Clinicians were blinded to the antenatal diagnosis of FGR. FGR was defined as estimated fetal weight (EFW) <10th percentile at approximately 36 weeks of gestation, plus one or more indicators of placental dysfunction, including ultrasonic markers and maternal serum levels of placental biomarkers. A total of 2,754 children delivered at term were divided into 4 groups: FGR, appropriate-for-gestational age (AGA) with markers of placental dysfunction, healthy small-for-gestational age (SGA), and healthy AGA (referent). Educational outcomes (assessed at 5 to 7 years using UK national standards) were assessed with respect to FGR status using regression models adjusted for relevant covariates, including maternal, pregnancy, and socioeconomic factors. Compared to healthy AGA (N = 1,429), children with FGR (N = 250) were at higher risk of "below national standard" educational performance at 6 years (18% versus 11%; aOR 1.68; 95% CI 1.12 to 2.48, p = 0.01). By age 7, children with FGR were more likely to perform below standard in reading (21% versus 15%; aOR 1.46; 95% CI 0.99 to 2.13, p = 0.05), writing (28% versus 23%; aOR 1.46; 95% CI 1.02 to 2.07, p = 0.04), and mathematics (24% versus 16%; aOR 1.49; 95% CI 1.02 to 2.15, p = 0.03). This was consistent whether FGR was defined by ultrasound or biochemical markers. The educational attainment of healthy SGA children (N = 126) was comparable to healthy AGA, although this comparison may be underpowered. Our study design relied on linkage of routinely collected educational data according to nationally standardised metrics; this design allowed a high percentage of eligible participants to be included in the analysis (75%) but excludes those children educated outside of government-funded schools in the UK. Our focus on pragmatic and validated measures of educational attainment does not exclude more subtle effects of the intrauterine environment on specific aspects of neurodevelopment.

CONCLUSIONS

Compared to children with normal fetal growth and no markers of placental dysfunction, FGR is associated with poorer educational attainment in mid-childhood.

The 5-minute Apgar score and childhood school outcomes

AIM

To examine the association between Apgar score at 5 min and childhood developmental and educational outcome.

METHODS

A population-based data linkage study of births ≥37 weeks' gestation linked to developmental outcomes at preparatory school and educational outcomes at school grades 3, 5 and 7 in Victoria, Australia. Multivariable logistic regressions and generalised estimating equations were used.

RESULTS

There were 167,126 singleton infants with developmental results and 392,933 singleton infants with at least one educational result. There was an inverse relationship between Apgar score at 5 min and poor developmental and educational outcomes, with the worst outcomes among Apgar scores of 0-3. Apgar scores of 7, 8 and 9 were all associated with poorer developmental outcomes (aOR = 1.31, 95% CI: 1.12-1.54; aOR = 1.17, 95% CI: 1.05-1.29; aOR = 1.08, 95% CI: 1.02-1.13 respectively), while Apgar scores of 7 and 8 were associated with poorer educational outcomes at grades 3, 5, and 7. With progression through grades 3, 5, and 7, the extent of the difference in educational outcomes diminished (e.g. for Apgar scores of 0-3: aOR = 3.33, 95% CI: 1.85-6.00 in grade 3 and aOR = 1.49, 95% CI: 0.75-2.96 in grade 7).

CONCLUSION

Apgar scores below 10 at 5 min are associated with poorer developmental and educational outcomes in school.

Evaluation of the Growth Assessment Protocol (GAP) for antenatal detection of small for gestational age: The DESiGN cluster randomised trial

BACKGROUND

Antenatal detection and management of small for gestational age (SGA) is a strategy to reduce stillbirth. Large observational studies provide conflicting results on the effect of the Growth Assessment Protocol (GAP) in relation to detection of SGA and reduction of stillbirth; to the best of our knowledge, there are no reported randomised control trials. Our aim was to determine if GAP improves antenatal detection of SGA compared to standard care.

METHODS AND FINDINGS

This was a pragmatic, superiority, 2-arm, parallel group, open, cluster randomised control trial. Maternity units in England were eligible to participate in the study, except if they had already implemented GAP. All women who gave birth in participating clusters (maternity units) during the year prior to randomisation and during the trial (November 2016 to February 2019) were included. Multiple pregnancies, fetal abnormalities or births before 24+1 weeks were excluded. Clusters were randomised to immediate implementation of GAP, an antenatal care package aimed at improving detection of SGA as a means to reduce the rate of stillbirth, or to standard care. Randomisation by random permutation was stratified by time of study inclusion and cluster size. Data were obtained from hospital electronic records for 12 months prerandomisation, the washout period (interval between randomisation and data collection of outcomes), and the outcome period (last 6 months of the study). The primary outcome was ultrasound detection of SGA (estimated fetal weight <10th centile using customised centiles (intervention) or Hadlock centiles (standard care)) confirmed at birth (birthweight <10th centile by both customised and population centiles). Secondary outcomes were maternal and neonatal outcomes, including induction of labour, gestational age at delivery, mode of birth, neonatal morbidity, and stillbirth/perinatal mortality. A 2-stage cluster-summary statistical approach calculated the absolute difference (intervention minus standard care arm) adjusted using the prerandomisation estimate, maternal age, ethnicity, parity, and randomisation strata. Intervention arm clusters that made no attempt to implement GAP were excluded in modified intention to treat (mITT) analysis; full ITT was also reported. Process evaluation assessed implementation fidelity, reach, dose, acceptability, and feasibility. Seven clusters were randomised to GAP and 6 to standard care. Following exclusions, there were 11,096 births exposed to the intervention (5 clusters) and 13,810 exposed to standard care (6 clusters) during the outcome period (mITT analysis). Age, height, and weight were broadly similar between arms, but there were fewer women: of white ethnicity (56.2% versus 62.7%), and in the least deprived quintile of the Index of Multiple Deprivation (7.5% versus 16.5%) in the intervention arm during the outcome period. Antenatal detection of SGA was 25.9% in the intervention and 27.7% in the standard care arm (adjusted difference 2.2%, 95% confidence interval (CI) -6.4% to 10.7%; p = 0.62). Findings were consistent in full ITT analysis. Fidelity and dose of GAP implementation were variable, while a high proportion (88.7%) of women were reached. Use of routinely collected data is both a strength (cost-efficient) and a limitation (occurrence of missing data); the modest number of clusters limits our ability to study small effect sizes.

CONCLUSIONS

In this study, we observed no effect of GAP on antenatal detection of SGA compared to standard care. Given variable implementation observed, future studies should incorporate standardised implementation outcomes such as those reported here to determine generalisability of our findings.

TRIAL REGISTRATION

This trial is registered with the ISRCTN registry, ISRCTN67698474.

Gestational cholestasis induced intrauterine growth restriction through triggering IRE1α-mediated apoptosis of placental trophoblast cells

Epidemiological and animal experimental studies suggest an association between gestational cholestasis and intrauterine growth restriction (IUGR). Here, we explored the mechanism through which gestational cholestasis induced IUGR. To establish gestational cholestasis model, pregnant mice were subcutaneously injected with 17α-Ethynylestradiol (E2) on gestational day 13 (GD13)-GD17. Some pregnant mice were intraperitoneally injected with 4μ8C on GD13-GD17. The results found that the apoptosis of trophoblast cells was elevated in placentas of mice with gestational cholestasis and in deoxycholic acid (DCA)-treated human trophoblast cell lines and primary mouse trophoblast cells. Correspondingly, the levels of placental cleaved caspase-3 and Bax were increased, while placental Bcl2 level was decreased in mice with gestational cholestasis and in DCA-treated trophoblast cells. Further analysis found that placental IRE1α pathway was activated in mice with gestational cholestasis and in DCA-treated trophoblast cells. Interestingly, 4μ8C, an IRE1α RNase inhibitor, significantly inhibited caspase-3 activity and apoptosis of trophoblast cells in vivo and in vitro. Importantly, 4μ8C rescued gestational cholestasis-induced placental insufficiency and IUGR. Furthermore, a case-control study demonstrated that placental IRE1α and caspase-3 pathways were activated in cholestasis cases. Our results provide evidence that gestational cholestasis induces placental insufficiency and IUGR may be via triggering IRE1α-mediated apoptosis of placental trophoblast cells.

How and when to recommend delivery of a growth-restricted fetus: A review

Clinicians consider a range of variables when formulating decisions regarding the diagnosis, monitoring plan, and ultimately the decision to recommend the delivery of a growth-restricted fetus. The differential diagnosis of a pathological fetal growth pattern is initially considered via the history, a physical and laboratory examination of the pregnant person, as well as a comprehensive fetal ultrasound examination. These factors allow a broad distinction between pre-existing disease in the pregnant person, constitutionally small normal growth, placenta-mediated Fetal Growth Restriction (FGR), and intrinsic fetal disease. Most commonly, pathological growth restriction is mediated by underlying placental diseases, of which maternal vascular malperfusion is the most common, and often results in co-existent hypertension. A program of combined monitoring of the pregnant person and fetus, comprising hypertension assessment, and serial fetal ultrasound, including Doppler studies is then instituted, and may be combined with biochemical markers, such as Placental Growth Factor, for greater clinical precision. Recommendations on timing to deliver the growth-restricted fetus worldwide are converging, with similar guidance from clinical practice guidelines informed by high-quality Randomized Controlled Trials (RCTs) and large cohort studies. In most instances, it is reasonable to recommend delivery of all growth-restricted fetuses by approximately 38 weeks. Timing of delivery should take into consideration both short-term neonatal outcomes and long-term outcomes at school age. Mode of delivery is based on many factors, and induction of labor is a safe approach, especially after 34 weeks. Mechanical methods of induction may be preferred to pharmacologic methods, although both have a role and the choice of method is based on individualized assessment. Elective Cesarean birth thereby bypassing fetal stress during labor, is recommended in preterm growth-restricted fetuses with signs of adaptive fetal compromise, especially when ductus venosus flow is abnormal, or a contraction stress test is positive.