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
ISSN 0300-9092 (Print)
ISSN 2412-5679 (Online)
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 Gynegology2025№8
Doppler evaluation of cerebral blood...

Doppler evaluation of cerebral blood flow in the differential diagnosis of late-onset fetal growth restriction

DOI
https://dx.doi.org/10.18565/aig.2025.184

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

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

Background: Late-onset fetal growth restriction (FGR) is associated with an increased risk of stillbirth and neonatal morbidity. However, the differentiation between FGR and small-for-gestational-age (SGA) fetuses in the third trimester remains challenging. Fetal Doppler assessment traditionally plays a key role and is considered to be a potential tool for risk stratification and optimization of obstetric management in cases of FGR. In recent years, there has been an active discussion about the role of cerebral blood flow in the targeted monitoring of fetal health and the improvement of perinatal outcomes.
Objective: To study the diagnostic value of Doppler ultrasound parameters characteristic of centralization of fetal cerebral blood flow after 32 weeks gestation in the differential diagnosis of late-onset FGR and SGA, as well as their association with adverse perinatal outcomes.
Materials and methods: This was a prospective study that included 140 pregnant women after 32 weeks gestation, namely 72 patients with SGA fetuses and 68 patients with late-onset FGR, selected according to the guidelines of the Russian Society of Obstetricians and Gynecologists (RSOG). All participants underwent Doppler ultrasound assessment; the cerebroplacental ratio (CPR) and umbilicocerebral ratio (UCR) were calculated. The findings of the Doppler study, performed as close to delivery as possible, were used for analysis. Changes in Doppler parameters in both groups were studied, and their correlation with perinatal outcomes was assessed using logistic regression analysis.
Results: The comparison of perinatal outcomes showed that pregnant women with late-onset FGR compared to SGA fetuses had a higher rate of preterm birth, emergency delivery by cesarean section, birth of infants with a body weight below the 3rd percentile, and need for hospitalization of newborns in the neonatal intensive care unit (NICU). The parameters of Doppler ultrasound study (umbilical artery pulsatility index (UA PI), middle cerebral artery (MCA) PI, CPR, and UCR) in the late-onset FGR group more often exceeded the standard values. The median CPR was lower (1.19 vs. 1.70; p<0.001), and the median UCR was higher (0.84 vs. 0.59; p<0.001) in the late-onset FGR group compared to SGA. A significant association was found between UA PI, CPR, and UCR in pregnancies with FGR and adverse perinatal outcomes, such as preterm birth (OR: 76.3, p<0.001; 0.1, p<0.001; 26.5, p<0.001, respectively), emergency cesarean section due to fetal distress (OR: 4.1, p<0.05; 0.4, p=0.04; 4.5, p<0.05, respectively), neonatal hospitalization in the NICU (OR: 31.9, p<0.05; 0.1, p=0.04; 32.8, p<0.05, respectively), combined adverse perinatal outcome (OR: 13.3, p=0.002; 0.2, p=0.002; 11.2, p=0.05, respectively); however, ROC analysis (AUC, 95% CI) of the models for predicting combined adverse perinatal outcome showed low prognostic value of these parameters. The best diagnostic accuracy was demonstrated by the gestational age-adjusted centile values of CPR and UCR [0.695 (0.604–0.777) and 0.675 (0.582-0.758)], as well as the dichotomized by a predetermined centile values of UCR <5th centile and PCR>95th centile [0.641 (0.547–0.727) and 0.631 (0.538–0.718)]. No data were obtained to support the greater effectiveness of CPR or UCR. At the same time, extreme values characterizing the centralization of cerebral blood flow became more obvious and clearer for interpretation in case of using UCR.
Conclusion: Doppler parameters that characterize cerebral blood flow centralization, such as UA PI, MCA PI, CPR and UCR, are not effective enough to predict combined adverse perinatal outcome and its individual components in pregnancies with SGA fetuses and FGR. Gestational age-adjusted centile (continuous) values of CPR and UCR, as well as dichotomized by a pre-established cutoff centile value of CPR (<5th centile) and UCR (>95th centile) are more effective in predicting adverse perinatal outcomes. Further prospective studies are required to determine whether it is possible to include these parameters in clinical practice, as well as to find new markers that can predict adverse outcomes for children with late-onset FGR.

Authors’ contributions: Stoliarova E.V. – conducting the study, writing the text; Kholin A.M. – developing the concept of the study, conducting the study; Khodzhaeva Z.S. – supervision of the study, editing the text; Gus A.I. – developing the concept of the study, conducting the study.
Conflicts of interest: Authors declare lack of the possible conflicts of interests.
Funding: The study was carried out without sponsorship.
Ethical Approval: The study was approved by the Ethical Review Board of the Academician V.I. Kulakov National Medical Research Center for Obstetrics, Gynecology and Perinatology, Ministry of Health of Russia.
Patient Consent for Publication: The patients signed informed consent for the publication of their data.
Authors' Data Sharing Statement: The data supporting the findings of this study are available on request from the corresponding author after approval from the principal investigator.
For citation: Stoliarova E.V., Kholin A.M., Khodzhaeva Z.S., Gus A.I. Doppler evaluation of cerebral blood flow in 
the differential diagnosis of late-onset fetal growth restriction.
Akusherstvo i Ginekologiya/Obstetrics and Gynecology. 2025; (8): 88-98 (in Russian)
https://dx.doi.org/10.18565/aig.2025.184

Keywords

Late-onset fetal growth restriction
small for gestational age fetus
Doppler ultrasound assessment
cerebroplacental ratio
umbilicocerebral ratio
Full text (in Russian)

References

  1. Baschat A.A. Planning management and delivery of the growth-restricted fetus. Best Pract. Res. Clin. Obstet. Gynaecol. 2018; 49: 53-65. https://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.bpobgyn.2018.02.009
  2. 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
  3. Malhotra A., Ditchfield M., Fahey M.C., Castillo-Melendez M., Allison B.J., Polglase G.R. et al. Detection and assessment of brain injury in the growth-restricted fetus and neonate. Pediatr. Res. 2017; 82(2): 184-93. https://dx.doi.org/10.1038/pr.2017.37
  4. 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
  5. Ghi T., Frusca T., Lees C.C. Cerebroplacental ratio in fetal surveillance: an alert bell or a crash sound? Am. J. Obstet. Gynecol. 2016; 214(2): 297-98. https://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.ajog.2015.09.097
  6. Mylrea-Foley B., Thornton J.G., Mullins E., Marlow N., Hecher K., Ammari C. et al. 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
  7. Lees C.C., Romero R., Stampalija T., Dall'Asta A., DeVore G.A., Prefumo F. et al. Clinical opinion: the diagnosis and management of suspected fetal growth restriction: an evidence-based approach. Am. J. Obstet. Gynecol. 2022; 226(3): 366-78. https://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.ajog.2021.11.1357
  8. Sovio U., White I.R., Dacey A., Pasupathy D., Smith G.C.S. Screening for fetal growth restriction with universal third trimester ultrasonography in nulliparous women in the Pregnancy Outcome Prediction (POP) study: a prospective cohort study. Lancet. 2015; 386(10008): 2089-97. https://dx.doi.org/10.1016/S0140-6736(15)00131-2
  9. Stampalija T., Wolf H., Mylrea-Foley B., Marlow N., Stephens K.J., Shaw C.J. et al. Reduced fetal growth velocity and weight loss are associated with adverse perinatal outcome in fetuses at risk of growth restriction. Am. J. Obstet. Gynecol. 2023; 228(1): 71.e1-e10. https://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.ajog.2022.06.023
  10. Mylrea-Foley B., Lees C. Clinical monitoring of late fetal growth restriction. Minerva Obstet. Gynecol. 2021; 73(4): 462-70. https://dx.doi.org/10.23736/S2724-606X.21.04845-4
  11. Martinez J., Boada D., Figueras F., Meler E. How to define late fetal growth restriction. Minerva Obstet. Gynecol. 2021; 73(4): 409-14. https://dx.doi.org/10.23736/S2724-606X.21.04775-4
  12. Liu W., Liu J., Lou X., Zheng D., Wu B., Wang D.J. et al. A longitudinal study of cerebral blood flow under hypoxia at high altitude using 3D pseudo-continuous arterial spin labeling. Sci. Rep. 2017; 7: 43246. https://dx.doi.org/10.1038/srep43246
  13. Conde-Agudelo A., Villar J., Kennedy S.H., Papageorghiou A.T. Predictive accuracy of cerebroplacental ratio for adverse perinatal and neurodevelopmental outcomes in suspected fetal growth restriction: systematic review and meta-analysis. Ultrasound Obstet. Gynecol. 2018; 52(4): 430-41. https://dx.doi.org/10.1002/uog.19117
  14. Stampalija T., Arabin B., Wolf H., Bilardo C.M., Lees C. Is middle cerebral artery Doppler related to neonatal and 2-year infant outcome in early fetal growth restriction? Am. J. Obstet. Gynecol. 2017; 216(5) : 521.e521-e513. https://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.ajog.2017.01.001
  15. Acharya G., Ebbing C., Karlsen H.O., Kiserud T., Rasmussen S. Sex-specific reference ranges of cerebroplacental and umbilicocerebral ratios: longitudinal study. Ultrasound Obstet. Gynecol. 2020; 56(2): 187-95. https://dx.doi.org/10.1002/uog.21870
  16. Familiari A., Neri C., Vassallo C., Di Marco G., Garofalo S., Martino C. et al. Fetal Doppler parameters at term in pregnancies affected by gestational diabetes: role in the prediction of perinatal outcomes. Ultraschall Med. 2020; 41(6): 675-80. https://dx.doi.org/10.1055/a-0753-0120
  17. Di Mascio D., Rizzo G., Buca D., D'Amico A., Leombroni M., Tinari S. et al. Comparison between cerebroplacental ratio and umbilicocerebral ratio in predicting adverse perinatal outcome at term. Eur. J. Obstet. Gynecol. Reprod. Biol. 2020; 252: 439-43. https://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.ejogrb.2020.07.032
  18. 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
  19. Ciobanu A., Wright A., Syngelaki A., Wright D., Akolekar R., Nicolaides K.H. Fetal Medicine Foundation reference ranges for umbilical artery and middle cerebral artery pulsatility index and cerebroplacental ratio. Ultrasound Obstet. Gynecol. 2019; 53(4): 465-72. https://dx.doi.org/10.1002/uog.20157
  20. Nicolaides K.H., Wright D., Syngelaki A., Wright A., Akolekar R. Fetal Medicine Foundation fetal and neonatal population weight charts. Ultrasound Obstet. Gynecol. 2018; 52(1): 44-51. https://dx.doi.org/10.1002/uog.19073
  21. Oros D., Figueras F., Cruz-Martinez R., Meler E., Munmany M., Gratacos E. Longitudinal changes in uterine, umbilical and fetal cerebral Doppler indices in late-onset small-for-gestational age fetuses. Ultrasound Obstet. Gynecol. 2011; 37(2): 191-5. https://dx.doi.org/10.1002/uog.7738
  22. Meler E., Mazarico E., Eixarch E., Gonzalez A., Peguero A., Martinez J. et al. Ten-year experience of protocol-based management of small-for-gestational-age fetuses: perinatal outcome in late-pregnancy cases diagnosed after 32 weeks. Ultrasound Obstet. Gynecol. 2021; 57(1): 62-9. https://dx.doi.org/10.1002/uog.23537
  23. Arbeille P., Maulik D., Fignon A., Stale H., Berson M.., Bodard S. et al. Assessment of the fetal PO2 changes by cerebral and umbilical Doppler on lamb fetuses during acute hypoxia. Ultrasound Med. Biol. 1995; 21(7): 861-70. https://dx.doi.org/10.1016/0301-5629(95)00025-m
  24. 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.e281-5. https://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.ajog.2014.05.008
  25. González V.C., Herraiz I., Quezada M.S., Gómez-Arriaga P.I., Gómez-Montes E., Galindo A. Fetal biometry and Doppler study for the assessment of perinatal outcome in stage i late-onset fetal growth restriction. Fetal. Diagn. Ther. 2018; 44(4): 264-70. https://dx.doi.org/10.1159/000485124
  26. Gramellini D., Folli M.C., Raboni S., Vadora E., Merialdi A. Cerebral-umbilical Doppler ratio as a predictor of adverse perinatal outcome. Obstet. Gynecol. 1992; 79(3): 416-20. https://dx.doi.org/10.1097/00006250-199203000-00018
  27. Wolf H., Stampalija T., Monasta L., Lees C.C. Ratio of umbilical and cerebral artery pulsatility indices in assessment of fetal risk: numerator and denominator matter. Ultrasound Obstet. Gynecol. 2020; 56(2): 163-5. https://dx.doi.org/10.1002/uog.22004
  28. Stumpfe F.M., Mayr A., Schneider M.O., Kehl S., Stübs F., Antoniadis S. et al. Cerebroplacental versus umbilicocerebral ratio-analyzing the predictive value regarding adverse perinatal outcomes in low- and high-risk fetuses at term. Medicina (Kaunas). 2023; 59(8): 1385. https://dx.doi.org/10.3390/medicina59081385
  29. Kalafat E., Ozturk E., Kalaylioglu Z., Akkaya A.D., Khalil A. Re: Ratio of umbilical and cerebral artery pulsatility indices in assessment of fetal risk: numerator and denominator matter. Ultrasound Obstet. Gynecol. 2020; 56(2): 290-2. https://dx.doi.org/10.1002/uog.22139
  30. Di Mascio D., Herraiz I., Villalain C., Buca D., Morales-Rosello J., Loscalzo G. et al. Comparison between cerebroplacental ratio and umbilicocerebral ratio in predicting adverse perinatal outcome in pregnancies complicated by late fetal growth restriction: a multicenter, retrospective study. Fetal. Diagn. Ther. 2021; 48(6): 448-56. https://dx.doi.org/10.1159/000516443

Received 02.07.2025

Accepted 14.08.2025

About the Authors

Elizaveta V. Stoliarova, PhD student, 1st Obstetric Department of Pregnancy Pathology, V.I. Kulakov NMRC for OG&P, Ministry of Health of Russia,
117997, Russia, Moscow, Ac. Oparin str., 4, ev_stolyarova@oparina4.ru, https://orcid.org/0009-0001-2049-3119
Alexey M. Kholin, PhD, Head of the Department of Telemedicine, V.I. Kulakov NMRC for OG&P, Ministry of Health of Russia,
117997, Russia, Moscow, Ac. Oparin str., 4, a_kholin@oparina4.ru, https://orcid.org/0000-0002-4068-9805
Zulfiya S. Khodzhaeva, Dr. Med. Sci, Professor, Deputy Director, Institute of Obstetrics, V.I. Kulakov NMRC for OG&P, Ministry of Health of Russia,
117997, Russia, Moscow, Ac. Oparin str., 4, z_khodzhaeva@oparina4.ru, https://orcid.org/0000-0001-8159-3714
Aleksandr I. Gus, Dr. Med. Sci., Chief Researcher at the Department of Ultrasound and Functional Diagnostics, V.I. Kulakov NMRC for OG&P, Ministry of Health of Russia, 117997, Russia, Moscow, Ac. Oparin str., 4; Head of the Department of Ultrasound Diagnostics, Medical Institute of Patrice Lumumba Peoples’ Friendship University of Russia, a_gus@oparina4.ru, https://orcid.org/0000-0003-1377-3128

Similar Articles

№6 / 2024
Bespalova O.N., Blazhenko A.A., Kopteeva E.V., Pachulia O.V., Shelaeva E.V., Kogan I.Yu.
Potential of ultrasound diagnostics in an experimental model of fetal growth restriction
№10 / 2024
Gasymova Sh.R., Tyutyunnik V.L., Kan N.E., Volochaeva M.V., Donnikov A.E.
Clinical and anamnestic risk factors and prediction models for the development of fetal growth restriction
№12 / 2020
Yarygina T.A., Gus A.I.
Fetal growth restriction (retardation): everything the practitioner should know
№8 / 2025
Ziyadinov A.A., Novikova V.A., Radzinsky V.E.
Fetal sex as a risk factor for fetal growth restriction or small for gestational age
By continuing to use our site, you consent to the processing of cookies that ensure the proper functioning of the site.