About
The Journal "Obstetrics and Gynecology"Journal HistoryAims and ScopePolicies on Conflict of Interest, Human and Animal Rights, and Informed ConsentEditorial ProcessData sharing statementAdvertising PolicyThe Process for Handling Cases Requiring Corrections, Retractions, and Editorial Expressions of ConcernEditorial BoardEditorial CounsilInformation for ProfessionalsNewsContacts
ArchiveEthical StandardsSubscription
For authors
InstructionsInformed consent policyContract offerEASE GuidelinesICJME CriteriaWAME Recommendations on ChatGPT and Chatbots in Relation to Scholarly Publications
Reviewing
Procedure for reviewingReviewers 2023-2024
About
The Journal "Obstetrics and Gynecology"Journal HistoryAims and ScopePolicies on Conflict of Interest, Human and Animal Rights, and Informed ConsentEditorial ProcessData sharing statementAdvertising PolicyThe Process for Handling Cases Requiring Corrections, Retractions, and Editorial Expressions of ConcernEditorial BoardEditorial CounsilInformation for ProfessionalsNewsContacts
ArchiveEthical StandardsSubscription
For authors
InstructionsInformed consent policyContract offerEASE GuidelinesICJME CriteriaWAME Recommendations on ChatGPT and Chatbots in Relation to Scholarly Publications
Reviewing
Procedure for reviewingReviewers 2023-2024
Logout
Obstetrics and Gynegology2024№8
Analytical review of the national...

Analytical review of the national and international clinical guidelines for the management of pregnancies complicated by fetal growth restriction

DOI
https://dx.doi.org/10.18565/aig.2024.93

Khodzhaeva Z.S., Stolyarova E.V., Kholin A.M., Gus A.I.

1) Academician V.I. Kulakov National Medical Research Centre for Obstetrics, Gynecology and Perinatology, Ministry of Health of Russia, Moscow, Russia; 2) Patrice Lumumba Peoples’ Friendship University of Russia, Moscow, Russia

Fetal growth restriction (FGR) affects about 10% of pregnancies and it is a leading cause of stillbirth, neonatal mortality and morbidity. In addition to immediate complications, it has metabolic imprinting and affects perinatal programming. 
Among the great obstetrical syndromes, FGR occupies a special place, primarily due to the lack of clinical manifestations. In this regard, modern obstetric tactics are based solely on functional methods of diagnostics of the fetal condition. The existing clinical guidelines and protocols on this issue make it much easier for clinicians to decide on an emergency delivery. At the same time, clinical situations where a balance must be achieved between prolongation of pregnancy and the risk of antenatal fetal death require close monitoring of specific anatomical zones of fetal-placental circulation, depending on the gestational age. This review presents the analysis of the national (Russian Society of Obstetricians and Gynecologists) and international (FIGO, ISUOG, SMFM, ACOG) clinical guidelines and protocols in order to form a consensus approach and, if necessary, to identify areas for further research to standardize obstetric management of pregnant women with FGR.
Conclusion: Future research should focus on determining differentiated functional diagnostic test scores based on estimated fetal weight, gestational age, patient condition, and neonatal development. Such a practical approach based on randomized trials and its implementation in clinical guidelines will reduce perinatal morbidity and mortality, as well as improve long-term outcomes in late FGR.

Authors’ contributions: Khodzhaeva Z.S. – research supervision, writing and final editing the text of the article; Stolyarova E.V. – writing the text of the article; Kholin A.M. – selection of literature sources, editing the text of the article; Gus A.I. – editing the text of the article.
Conflicts of interest: Authors declare lack of the possible conflicts of interests.
Funding: The study was performed within the framework of the research work No. 121040600408-4 of the state assignment of the Academician V.I. Kulakov National Medical Research Centre for Obstetrics, Gynecology and Perinatology, Ministry of Health of Russia, for 2023–2024.
For citation: Khodzhaeva Z.S., Stolyarova E.V., Kholin A.M., Gus A.I. Analytical review of the national and international clinical guidelines for the management of pregnancies complicated by fetal growth restriction.
Akusherstvo i Ginekologiya/Obstetrics and Gynecology. 2024; (8): 5-13 (in Russian)
https://dx.doi.org/10.18565/aig.2024.93

Keywords

fetal growth restriction
small for gestational age
clinical guidelines
ultrasound
Doppler color flow mapping
computerized cardiotocography
Full text (in Russian)

References

  1. Mylrea-Foley B., Napolitano R., Gordijn S., Wolf H., Lees C.C., Stampalija T.; TRUFFLE-2 Feasibility Study Authors. Do differences in diagnostic criteria for late fetal growth restriction matter? Am. J. Obstet. Gynecol. MFM. 2023; 5(11): 101117. https://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.ajogmf.2023.101117.
  2. Andescavage N., Bullen T., Liggett M., Barnett S.D., Kapse A., Kapse K. et al. Impaired in vivo feto-placental development is associated with neonatal neurobehavioral outcomes. Pediatr. Res. 2023; 93(5): 1276-84. https://dx.doi.org/10.1038/s41390-022-02340-0.
  3. Gardosi J., Kady S.M., McGeown P., Francis A., Tonks A. Classification of stillbirth by relevant condition at death (ReCoDe): population based cohort study. BMJ. 2005; 331(7525): 1113-7. https://dx.doi.org/10.1136/bmj.38629.587639.7C.
  4. McCowan L.M.E., Thompson J.M.D., Cronin R.S., Li M., Stacey T., Stone P.R. et al. Going to sleep in the supine position is a modifiable risk factor for late pregnancy stillbirth; findings from the New Zealand multicentre stillbirth case-control study. PLoS One. 2017; 12(6): e0179396. https://dx.doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0179396.
  5. Flenady V., Wojcieszek A.M., Middleton P., Ellwood D., Erwich J.J., Coory M. et al.; Lancet Ending Preventable Stillbirths study group; Lancet Stillbirths In High-Income Countries Investigator Group. Stillbirths: recall to action in high-income countries. Lancet. 2016; 387(10019): 691-702. https://dx.doi.org/10.1016/S0140-6736(15)01020-X.
  6. Savchev S., Figueras F., Sanz-Cortes M., Cruz-Lemini M., Triunfo S., Botet F. et al. Evaluation of an optimal gestational age cut-off for the definition of early- and late-onset fetal growth restriction. Fetal. Diagn. Ther. 2014; 36(2): 99-105. https://dx.doi.org/10.1159/000355525.
  7. Platz E., Newman R. Diagnosis of IUGR: traditional biometry. Semin. Perinatol. 2008; 32(3): 140-7. https://dx.doi.org/10.1053/j.semperi.2008.02.002.
  8. Министерство здравоохранения Российской Федерации. Клинические рекомендации. Недостаточный рост плода, требующий предоставления медицинской помощи матери (задержка роста плода). 2022. [Ministry of Health of the Russian Federation. Clinical guidelines. Insufficient growth of the fetus, requiring the provision of medical care to the mother (fetal growth retardation). 2022. (in Russian)].
  9. Lees C.C., Stampalija T., Baschat A., da Silva Costa F., Ferrazzi E., Figueras F. et al. ISUOG Practice Guidelines: diagnosis and management of small-for-gestational-age fetus and fetal growth restriction. Ultrasound Obstet. Gynecol. 2020; 56(2): 298-312. https://dx.doi.org/10.1002/uog.22134.
  10. Melamed N., Baschat A., Yinon Y., Athanasiadis A., Mecacci F., Figueras F. et al. FIGO (International Federation of Gynecology and Obstetrics) initiative on fetal growth: best practice advice for screening, diagnosis, and management of fetal growth restriction. Int. J. Gynaecol. Obstet. 2021; 152 Suppl. 1(Suppl. 1): 3-57. https://dx.doi.org/10.1002/ijgo.13522.
  11. Figueras F., Savchev S., Triunfo S., Crovetto F., Gratacos E. An integrated model with classification criteria to predict small-for-gestational-age fetuses at risk of adverse perinatal outcome. Ultrasound Obstet. Gynecol. 2015; 45(3): 279-85. https://dx.doi.org/10.1002/uog.14714.
  12. Gordijn S.J., Beune I.M., Thilaganathan B., Papageorghiou A., Baschat A.A., Baker P.N. et al. Consensus definition of fetal growth restriction: a Delphi procedure. Ultrasound Obstet. Gynecol. 2016; 48(3): 333-9. https://dx.doi.org/10.1002/uog.15884.
  13. Demirdjian S.P., Meller C.H., Berruet M.C., Dosdoglirian G., Etchegaray A. Perinatal outcomes of two consecutive strategies for the management of fetal growth restriction: a before-after study. Arch. Gynecol. Obstet. 2023; 307(1): 319-26. https://dx.doi.org/10.1007/s00404-022-06641-x.
  14. Vollgraff Heidweiller-Schreurs C.A., De Boer M.A., Heymans M.W., Schoonmade L.J., Bossuyt P.M.M., Mol B.W.J. et al. Prognostic accuracy of cerebroplacental ratio and middle cerebral artery Doppler for adverse perinatal outcome: systematic review and meta-analysis. Ultrasound Obstet. Gynecol. 2018; 51(3): 313-22. https://dx.doi.org/10.1002/uog.18809.
  15. Vollgraff Heidweiller-Schreurs C.A., van Osch I.R., Heymans M.W., Ganzevoort W., Schoonmade L.J., Bax C.J. et al. Authors' reply re: Cerebroplacental ratio in predicting adverse perinatal outcome: a meta-analysis of individual participant data. BJOG. 2020; 127(11): 1439-40. https://dx.doi.org/10.1111/1471-0528.16375.
  16. Fetal Growth Restriction: ACOG Practice Bulletin, Number 227. Obstet. Gynecol. 2021; 137(2): e16-e28. https://dx.doi.org/10.1097/AOG.0000000000004251.
  17. Martins J.G., Biggio J.R., Abuhamad A.; Society for Maternal-Fetal Medicine (SMFM). Society for Maternal-Fetal Medicine Consult Series #52: Diagnosis and management of fetal growth restriction: (replaces Clinical Guideline Number 3, April 2012). Am. J. Obstet. Gynecol. 2020; 223(4): B2-B17. https://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.ajog.2020.05.010.
  18. Roeckner J.T., Pressman K., Odibo L., Duncan J.R., Odibo A.O. Outcome-based comparison of SMFM and ISUOG definitions of fetal growth restriction. Ultrasound Obstet. Gynecol. 2021; 57(6): 925-30. https://dx.doi.org/10.1002/uog.23638.
  19. Pilliod R.A., Cheng Y.W., Snowden J.M., Doss A.E., Caughey A.B. The risk of intrauterine fetal death in the small-for-gestational-age fetus. Am. J. Obstet. Gynecol. 2012; 207(4): 318.e1-6. https://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.ajog.2012.06.039.
  20. Hadlock F.P., Harrist R.B., Martinez-Poyer J. In utero analysis of fetal growth: a sonographic weight standard. Radiology. 1991; 181(1): 129-33. https://dx.doi.org/10.1148/radiology.181.1.1887021.
  21. Figueras F., Gratacós E. Update on the diagnosis and classification of fetal growth restriction and proposal of a stage-based management protocol. Fetal. Diagn. Ther. 2014; 36(2): 86-98. https://dx.doi.org/10.1159/000357592.
  22. Grivell R.M., Alfirevic Z., Gyte G.M., Devane D. Antenatal cardiotocography for fetal assessment. Cochrane Database Syst. Rev. 2015; 2015(9): CD007863. https://dx.doi.org/10.1002/14651858.CD007863.pub4.
  23. Street P., Dawes G.S., Moulden M., Redman C.W. Short-term variation in abnormal antenatal fetal heart rate records. Am. J. Obstet. Gynecol. 1991; 165(3): 515-23. https://dx.doi.org/10.1016/0002-9378(91)90277-x.
  24. Turan S., Turan O.M., Berg C., Moyano D., Bhide A., Bower S. et al. Computerized fetal heart rate analysis, Doppler ultrasound and biophysical profile score in the prediction of acid-base status of growth-restricted fetuses. Ultrasound Obstet. Gynecol. 2007; 30(5): 750-6. https://dx.doi.org/10.1002/uog.4101.
  25. Richardson B.S., Bocking A.D. Metabolic and circulatory adaptations to chronic hypoxia in the fetus. Comp. Biochem. Physiol. A Mol. Integr. Physiol. 1998; 119(3): 717-23. https://dx.doi.org/10.1016/s1095-6433(98)01010-1.
  26. Turan O.M., Turan S., Gungor S., Berg C., Moyano D., Gembruch U. et al. Progression of Doppler abnormalities in intrauterine growth restriction. Ultrasound Obstet. Gynecol. 2008; 32(2): 160-7. https://dx.doi.org/10.1002/uog.5386.
  27. Ferrazzi E., Bozzo M., Rigano S., Bellotti M., Morabito A., Pardi G. et al. Temporal sequence of abnormal Doppler changes in the peripheral and central circulatory systems of the severely growth-restricted fetus. Ultrasound Obstet. Gynecol. 2002; 19(2): 140-6. https://dx.doi.org/10.1046/j.0960-7692.2002.00627.x.
  28. Eixarch E., Meler E., Iraola A., Illa M., Crispi F., Hernandez-Andrade E. et al. Neurodevelopmental outcome in 2-year-old infants who were small-for-gestational age term fetuses with cerebral blood flow redistribution. Ultrasound Obstet. Gynecol. 2008; 32(7): 894-9. https://dx.doi.org/10.1002/uog.6249.
  29. Hernandez-Andrade E., Figueroa-Diesel H., Jansson T., Rangel-Nava H., Gratacos E. Changes in regional fetal cerebral blood flow perfusion in relation to hemodynamic deterioration in severely growth-restricted fetuses. Ultrasound Obstet. Gynecol. 2008; 32(1): 71-6. https://dx.doi.org/10.1002/uog.5377.
  30. Cruz-Martínez R., Figueras F., Hernandez-Andrade E., Oros D., Gratacos E. Fetal brain Doppler to predict cesarean delivery for nonreassuring fetal status in term small-for-gestational-age fetuses. Obstet. Gynecol. 2011; 117(3): 618-26. https://dx.doi.org/10.1097/AOG.0b013e31820b0884.
  31. Crimmins S., Desai A., Block-Abraham D., Berg C., Gembruch U., Baschat A.A. A comparison of Doppler and biophysical findings between liveborn and stillborn growth-restricted fetuses. Am. J. Obstet. Gynecol. 2014; 211(6): 669.e1-10. https://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.ajog.2014.06.022.
  32. Dudink I., Hüppi P.S., Sizonenko S.V., Castillo-Melendez M., Sutherland A.E., Allison B.J. et al. Altered trajectory of neurodevelopment associated with fetal growth restriction. Exp. Neurol. 2022; 347: 113885. https://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.expneurol.2021.113885.
  33. Baschat A.A. Neurodevelopment after fetal growth restriction. Fetal Diagn. Ther. 2014; 36(2): 136-42. https://dx.doi.org/10.1159/000353631.
  34. Mylrea-Foley B., Thornton J.G., Mullins E., Marlow N., Hecher K., Ammari C. et al.; TRUFFLE 2 Collaborators List. Perinatal and 2-year neurodevelopmental outcome in late preterm fetal compromise: the TRUFFLE 2 randomised trial protocol. BMJ Open. 2022; 12(4): e055543. https://dx.doi.org/10.1136/bmjopen-2021-055543.
  35. Pels A., Mensing van Charante N.A., Vollgraff Heidweiller-Schreurs C.A., Limpens J., Wolf H., de Boer M.A. et al. The prognostic accuracy of short term variation of fetal heart rate in early-onset fetal growth restriction: A systematic review. Eur. J. Obstet. Gynecol. Reprod. Biol. 2019; 234: 179-84. https://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.ejogrb.2019.01.005.
  36. Lees C., Marlow N., Arabin B., Bilardo C.M., Brezinka C., Derks J.B. et al.; TRUFFLE Group. Perinatal morbidity and mortality in early-onset fetal growth restriction: cohort outcomes of the trial of randomized umbilical and fetal flow in Europe (TRUFFLE). Ultrasound Obstet. Gynecol. 2013; 42(4): 400-8. https://dx.doi.org/10.1002/uog.13190.
  37. Alameddine S., Capannolo G., Rizzo G., Khalil A., Di Girolamo R., Iacovella C. et al. A systematic review and critical evaluation of quality of clinical practice guidelines on fetal growth restriction. J. Perinat. Med. 2023; 51(8): 970-80. https://dx.doi.org/10.1515/jpm-2022-0590.
  38. Groom K.M., David A.L. The role of aspirin, heparin, and other interventions in the prevention and treatment of fetal growth restriction. Am. J. Obstet. Gynecol. 2018; 218(2S): S829-S840. https://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.ajog.2017.11.565.
  39. Baschat A.A., Cosmi E., Bilardo C.M., Wolf H., Berg C., Rigano S. et al. Predictors of neonatal outcome in early-onset placental dysfunction. Obstet. Gynecol. 2007; 109(2 Pt 1): 253-61. https://dx.doi.org/10.1097/01.AOG.0000253215.79121.75.
  40. Miller S.L., Huppi P.S., Mallard C. The consequences of fetal growth restriction on brain structure and neurodevelopmental outcome. J. Physiol. 2016; 594(4): 807-23. https://dx.doi.org/10.1113/JP271402.
  41. Levine T.A., Grunau R.E., McAuliffe F.M., Pinnamaneni R., Foran A., Alderdice F.A. Early childhood neurodevelopment after intrauterine growth restriction: a systematic review. Pediatrics. 2015; 135(1): 126-41. https://dx.doi.org/10.1542/peds.2014-1143.
  42. Gaugler-Senden I.P., Huijssoon A.G., Visser W., Steegers E.A., de Groot C.J. Maternal and perinatal outcome of preeclampsia with an onset before 24 weeks' gestation. Audit in a tertiary referral center. Eur. J. Obstet. Gynecol. Reprod. Biol. 2006; 128(1-2): 216-21. https://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.ejogrb.2005.11.011.
  43. Genzel-Boroviczény O., Hempelman J., Zoppelli L., Martinez A. Predictive value of the 1-min Apgar score for survival at 23-26 weeks gestational age. Acta Paediatr. 2010; 99(12): 1790-4. https://dx.doi.org/10.1111/j.1651-2227.2010.01937.x.
  44. Thornton J.G., Hornbuckle J., Vail A., Spiegelhalter D.J., Levene M.; GRIT study group. Infant wellbeing at 2 years of age in the Growth Restriction Intervention Trial (GRIT): multicentred randomised controlled trial. Lancet. 2004; 364(9433): 513-20. https://dx.doi.org/10.1016/S0140-6736(04)16809-8.
  45. Boers K.E., Vijgen S.M., Bijlenga D., van der Post J.A., Bekedam D.J., Kwee A. et al.; DIGITAT study group. Induction versus expectant monitoring for intrauterine growth restriction at term: randomised equivalence trial (DIGITAT). BMJ. 2010; 341: c7087. https://dx.doi.org/10.1136/bmj.c7087.
  46. Moraitis A.A., Wood A.M., Fleming M., Smith G.C.S. Birth weight percentile and the risk of term perinatal death. Obstet. Gynecol. 2014; 124(2 Pt 1): 274-83. https://dx.doi.org/10.1097/AOG.0000000000000388.
  47. Vashevnik S., Walker S., Permezel M. Stillbirths and neonatal deaths in appropriate, small and large birthweight for gestational age fetuses. Aust. N. Z. J. Obstet. Gynaecol. 2007; 47(4): 302-6. https://dx.doi.org/10.1111/j.1479-828X.2007.00742.x.
  48. Flood K., Unterscheider J., Daly S., Geary M.P., Kennelly M.M., McAuliffe F.M. et al. The role of brain sparing in the prediction of adverse outcomes in intrauterine growth restriction: results of the multicenter PORTO Study. Am. J. Obstet. Gynecol. 2014; 211(3): 288.e1-5. https://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.ajog.2014.05.008.
  49. Stampalija T., Thornton J., Marlow N., Napolitano R., Bhide A., Pickles T. et al.; TRUFFLE-2 Group. Fetal cerebral Doppler changes and outcome in late preterm fetal growth restriction: prospective cohort study. Ultrasound Obstet. Gynecol. 2020; 56(2): 173-81. https://dx.doi.org/10.1002/uog.22125.
  50. Giancarlo M. Fetal growth restriction: pregnancy management and outcome. 2024. Available at: https://www.uptodate.com/contents/fetal-growth-restriction-pregnancy-management-and-outcome?source=bookmarks
  51. Poulain P., Palaric J.C., Milon J., Betremieux P., Proudhon J.F., Signorelli D. et al. Absent end diastolic flow of umbilical artery Doppler: pregnancy outcome in 62 cases. Eur. J. Obstet. Gynecol. Reprod. Biol. 1994; 53(2): 115-9. https://dx.doi.org/10.1016/0028-2243(94)90217-8.
  52. Werner E.F., Savitz D.A., Janevic T.M., Ehsanipoor R.M., Thung S.F., Funai E.F. et al. Mode of delivery and neonatal outcomes in preterm, small-for-gestational-age newborns. Obstet. Gynecol. 2012; 120(3): 560-4. https://dx.doi.org/10.1097/AOG.0b013e318265b16c.
  53. Bernardes T.P., Broekhuijsen K., Koopmans C.M., Boers K.E., van Wyk L., Tajik P. et al. Caesarean section rates and adverse neonatal outcomes after induction of labour versus expectant management in women with an unripe cervix: a secondary analysis of the HYPITAT and DIGITAT trials. BJOG. 2016; 123(9): 1501-8. https://dx.doi.org/10.1111/1471-0528.14028.
  54. van Wyk L., Boers K.E., van der Post J.A., van Pampus M.G., van Wassenaer A.G., van Baar A.L. et al.; DIGITAT Study Group. Effects on (neuro)developmental and behavioral outcome at 2 years of age of induced labor compared with expectant management in intrauterine growth-restricted infants: long-term outcomes of the DIGITAT trial. Am. J. Obstet. Gynecol. 2012; 206(5): 406.e1-7. https://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.ajog.2012.02.003.
  55. Familiari A., Khalil A., Rizzo G., Odibo A., Vergani P., Buca D. et al. Adverse intrapartum outcome in pregnancies complicated by small for gestational age and late fetal growth restriction undergoing induction of labor with Dinoprostone, Misoprostol or mechanical methods: a systematic review and meta-analysis. Eur. J. Obstet. Gynecol. Reprod. Biol. 2020; 252: 455-67. https://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.ejogrb.2020.07.020.

Received 16.04.2024

Accepted 20.07.2024

About the Authors

Zulfiya S. Khodzhaeva, Dr. Med. Sci, Professor, Deputy Director, Institute of Obstetrics, Academician V.I. Kulakov National Medical Research Center for Obstetrics, Gynecology and Perinatology, Ministry of Health of Russia, 117997, Russia, Moscow, Ac. Oparin str., 4, +7(495)438-07-88, z_khodzhaeva@oparina4.ru,
https://orcid.org/0000-0001-8159-3714
Elizaveta V. Stolyarova, PhD student, 1st Obstetric Department of Pregnancy Pathology, Academician V.I. Kulakov National Medical Research Center for Obstetrics, Gynecology and Perinatology, Ministry of Health of Russia, 117997, Russia, Moscow, Ac. Oparin str., 4, +7(495)438-07-74, ev_stolyarova@oparina4.ru,
https://orcid.org/0009-0001-2049-3119
Alexey M. Kholin, PhD, Head of the Department of Telemedicine, Academician V.I. Kulakov National Medical Research Center for Obstetrics, Gynecology and Perinatology, Ministry of Health of Russia, 117997, Russia, Moscow, Ac. Oparin str., 4, +7(495)438-25-38, a_kholin@oparina4.ru, https://orcid.org/0000-0002-4068-9805
Alexander I. Gus, Dr. Med. Sci., Chief Researcher at the Department of Ultrasound and Functional Diagnostics, Academician V.I. Kulakov National Medical Research Center for Obstetrics, Gynecology and Perinatology, Ministry of Health of Russia, 117997, Russia, Moscow, Ac. Oparin str., 4; Head of the Department of Ultrasound Diagnostics, Medical Institute, Patrice Lumumba Peoples’ Friendship University of Russia, +7(495)438-11-77, a_gus@oparina4.ru, https://orcid.org/0000-0003-1377-3128

Similar Articles

№10 / 2024
Krasnyi A.M., Kan N.E., Borisova A.G., Soldatova E.E., Tyutyunnik V.L., Volochaeva M.V.
The effect of incretin hormone GLP-1 on the phenotypic profile of mononuclear cells in fetal growth restriction
№5 / 2024
Kan N.E., Soldatova E.E., Tyutyunnik V.L., Borisova A.G., Tezikov Y.V., Lipatov I.S., Sadekova, A.A., Alekseev A.A., Krasnyi A.M.
Factors of energy metabolism in fetal growth restriction
№6 / 2024
Yarygina T.A., Gasanova R.M., Marzoeva O.V., Sypchenko E.V, Leonova E.I., Lyapin V.M., Shchegolev A.I., Gus A.I.
Analysis of pathomorphological characteristics of the placental structure in cases of prenatally diagnosed fetal congenital heart disease
№10 / 2023
Minaeva E.A., Starodubtseva N.L., Shmakov R.G., Chagovets V.V., Tokareva A.O., Novoselova A.V., Kukaev E.N., Frankevich V.E.
Potential of first trimester plasma lipidome in high-risk pregnancy groups
№4 / 2023
Sukhareva T.A., Martynov S.A., Adamyan L.V., Kulabukhova E.A., Uchevatkina P.V., Letunovskaya A.B., Boykova Yu.V.
Comparing the effectiveness of ultrasound and MRI in assessing cesarean uterine scar defects
By continuing to use our site, you consent to the processing of cookies that ensure the proper functioning of the site.