Fetal and umbilical Doppler ultrasound in high-risk pregnancies
Zarko Alfirevic, Tamara Stampalija, Gillian M L Gyte, Zarko Alfirevic, Tamara Stampalija, Gillian M L Gyte
Abstract
Background: Abnormal blood flow patterns in fetal circulation detected by Doppler ultrasound may indicate poor fetal prognosis. It is also possible false positive Doppler ultrasound findings could encourage inappropriate early delivery.
Objectives: The objective of this review was to assess the effects of Doppler ultrasound used to assess fetal well-being in high-risk pregnancies on obstetric care and fetal outcomes.
Search methods: We updated the search of the Cochrane Pregnancy and Childbirth Group's Trials Register on 30 September 2013.
Selection criteria: Randomised and quasi-randomised controlled trials of Doppler ultrasound for the investigation of umbilical and fetal vessels waveforms in high-risk pregnancies compared with no Doppler ultrasound.
Data collection and analysis: Two review authors independently assessed the studies for inclusion, assessed risk of bias and carried out data extraction. Data entry was checked.
Main results: Eighteen completed studies involving just over 10,000 women were included. The trials were generally of unclear quality with some evidence of possible publication bias. The use of Doppler ultrasound in high-risk pregnancy was associated with a reduction in perinatal deaths (risk ratio (RR) 0.71, 95% confidence interval (CI) 0.52 to 0.98, 16 studies, 10,225 babies, 1.2% versus 1.7 %, number needed to treat (NNT) = 203; 95% CI 103 to 4352). There were also fewer inductions of labour (average RR 0.89, 95% CI 0.80 to 0.99, 10 studies, 5633 women, random-effects) and fewer caesarean sections (RR 0.90, 95% CI 0.84 to 0.97, 14 studies, 7918 women). No difference was found in operative vaginal births (RR 0.95, 95% CI 0.80 to 1.14, four studies, 2813 women), nor in Apgar scores less than seven at five minutes (RR 0.92, 95% CI 0.69 to 1.24, seven studies, 6321 babies).
Authors' conclusions: Current evidence suggests that the use of Doppler ultrasound in high-risk pregnancies reduced the risk of perinatal deaths and resulted in less obstetric interventions. The quality of the current evidence was not of high quality, therefore, the results should be interpreted with some caution. Studies of high quality with follow-up studies on neurological development are needed.
Conflict of interest statement
None known.
Figures
![Figure 1](https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/instance/6464948/bin/nCD007529-AFig-FIG01.jpg)
![Figure 2](https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/instance/6464948/bin/nCD007529-AFig-FIG02.jpg)
![Figure 3](https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/instance/6464948/bin/nCD007529-AFig-FIG03.jpg)
![Figure 4](https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/instance/6464948/bin/nCD007529-AFig-FIG04.jpg)
![Figure 5](https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/instance/6464948/bin/nCD007529-AFig-FIG05.jpg)
![Analysis 1.1](https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/instance/6464948/bin/nCD007529-CMP-001-01.jpg)
![Analysis 1.2](https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/instance/6464948/bin/nCD007529-CMP-001-02.jpg)
![Analysis 1.3](https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/instance/6464948/bin/nCD007529-CMP-001-03.jpg)
![Analysis 1.4](https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/instance/6464948/bin/nCD007529-CMP-001-04.jpg)
![Analysis 1.5](https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/instance/6464948/bin/nCD007529-CMP-001-05.jpg)
![Analysis 1.7](https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/instance/6464948/bin/nCD007529-CMP-001-07.jpg)
Analysis 1.8
Comparison 1 Doppler ultrasound versus…
Analysis 1.8
Comparison 1 Doppler ultrasound versus no Doppler ultrasound, Outcome 8 Caesarean section (elective…
Analysis 1.9
Comparison 1 Doppler ultrasound versus…
Analysis 1.9
Comparison 1 Doppler ultrasound versus no Doppler ultrasound, Outcome 9 Caesarean section ‐…
Analysis 1.10
Comparison 1 Doppler ultrasound versus…
Analysis 1.10
Comparison 1 Doppler ultrasound versus no Doppler ultrasound, Outcome 10 Caesarean section ‐…
Analysis 1.11
Comparison 1 Doppler ultrasound versus…
Analysis 1.11
Comparison 1 Doppler ultrasound versus no Doppler ultrasound, Outcome 11 Spontaneous vaginal birth.
Analysis 1.12
Comparison 1 Doppler ultrasound versus…
Analysis 1.12
Comparison 1 Doppler ultrasound versus no Doppler ultrasound, Outcome 12 Operative vaginal birth.
Analysis 1.13
Comparison 1 Doppler ultrasound versus…
Analysis 1.13
Comparison 1 Doppler ultrasound versus no Doppler ultrasound, Outcome 13 Induction of labour.
Analysis 1.16
Comparison 1 Doppler ultrasound versus…
Analysis 1.16
Comparison 1 Doppler ultrasound versus no Doppler ultrasound, Outcome 16 Infant requiring intubation/ventilation.
Analysis 1.17
Comparison 1 Doppler ultrasound versus…
Analysis 1.17
Comparison 1 Doppler ultrasound versus no Doppler ultrasound, Outcome 17 Neonatal fitting/seizures.
Analysis 1.18
Comparison 1 Doppler ultrasound versus…
Analysis 1.18
Comparison 1 Doppler ultrasound versus no Doppler ultrasound, Outcome 18 Preterm labour.
Analysis 1.19
Comparison 1 Doppler ultrasound versus…
Analysis 1.19
Comparison 1 Doppler ultrasound versus no Doppler ultrasound, Outcome 19 Infant respiratory distress…
Analysis 1.21
Comparison 1 Doppler ultrasound versus…
Analysis 1.21
Comparison 1 Doppler ultrasound versus no Doppler ultrasound, Outcome 21 Neonatal admission to…
Analysis 1.22
Comparison 1 Doppler ultrasound versus…
Analysis 1.22
Comparison 1 Doppler ultrasound versus no Doppler ultrasound, Outcome 22 Hypoxic ischaemic encephalopathy.
Analysis 1.23
Comparison 1 Doppler ultrasound versus…
Analysis 1.23
Comparison 1 Doppler ultrasound versus no Doppler ultrasound, Outcome 23 Intraventricular haemorrhage.
Analysis 1.28
Comparison 1 Doppler ultrasound versus…
Analysis 1.28
Comparison 1 Doppler ultrasound versus no Doppler ultrasound, Outcome 28 Gestational age at…
Analysis 1.29
Comparison 1 Doppler ultrasound versus…
Analysis 1.29
Comparison 1 Doppler ultrasound versus no Doppler ultrasound, Outcome 29 Birth weight.
Analysis 1.30
Comparison 1 Doppler ultrasound versus…
Analysis 1.30
Comparison 1 Doppler ultrasound versus no Doppler ultrasound, Outcome 30 Length of infant…
Analysis 1.31
Comparison 1 Doppler ultrasound versus…
Analysis 1.31
Comparison 1 Doppler ultrasound versus no Doppler ultrasound, Outcome 31 Birth
Analysis 1.32
Comparison 1 Doppler ultrasound versus…
Analysis 1.32
Comparison 1 Doppler ultrasound versus no Doppler ultrasound, Outcome 32 Antenatal admissions (not…
Analysis 1.33
Comparison 1 Doppler ultrasound versus…
Analysis 1.33
Comparison 1 Doppler ultrasound versus no Doppler ultrasound, Outcome 33 Phototherapy for neonatal…
Analysis 1.34
Comparison 1 Doppler ultrasound versus…
Analysis 1.34
Comparison 1 Doppler ultrasound versus no Doppler ultrasound, Outcome 34 Abnormal neurological development…
Analysis 1.35
Comparison 1 Doppler ultrasound versus…
Analysis 1.35
Comparison 1 Doppler ultrasound versus no Doppler ultrasound, Outcome 35 Hospitalisation for IUGR…
Analysis 1.36
Comparison 1 Doppler ultrasound versus…
Analysis 1.36
Comparison 1 Doppler ultrasound versus no Doppler ultrasound, Outcome 36 Fetal distress in…
Analysis 1.37
Comparison 1 Doppler ultrasound versus…
Analysis 1.37
Comparison 1 Doppler ultrasound versus no Doppler ultrasound, Outcome 37 Birth weight
Analysis 1.38
Comparison 1 Doppler ultrasound versus…
Analysis 1.38
Comparison 1 Doppler ultrasound versus no Doppler ultrasound, Outcome 38 Periventricular leucomalacia (not…
Analysis 1.39
Comparison 1 Doppler ultrasound versus…
Analysis 1.39
Comparison 1 Doppler ultrasound versus no Doppler ultrasound, Outcome 39 Antenatal hospital stay.
Analysis 2.1
Comparison 2 Doppler ultrasound versus…
Analysis 2.1
Comparison 2 Doppler ultrasound versus no Doppler ultrasound (all subgroups), Outcome 1 Any…
Analysis 2.2
Comparison 2 Doppler ultrasound versus…
Analysis 2.2
Comparison 2 Doppler ultrasound versus no Doppler ultrasound (all subgroups), Outcome 2 Serious…
Analysis 3.1
Comparison 3 Doppler ultrasound alone…
Analysis 3.1
Comparison 3 Doppler ultrasound alone versus CTG alone, Outcome 1 Any perinatal death…
Analysis 3.3
Comparison 3 Doppler ultrasound alone…
Analysis 3.3
Comparison 3 Doppler ultrasound alone versus CTG alone, Outcome 3 Stillbirth.
Analysis 3.4
Comparison 3 Doppler ultrasound alone…
Analysis 3.4
Comparison 3 Doppler ultrasound alone versus CTG alone, Outcome 4 Neonatal death.
Analysis 3.5
Comparison 3 Doppler ultrasound alone…
Analysis 3.5
Comparison 3 Doppler ultrasound alone versus CTG alone, Outcome 5 Any potentially preventable…
Analysis 3.7
Comparison 3 Doppler ultrasound alone…
Analysis 3.7
Comparison 3 Doppler ultrasound alone versus CTG alone, Outcome 7 Apgar
Analysis 3.8
Comparison 3 Doppler ultrasound alone…
Analysis 3.8
Comparison 3 Doppler ultrasound alone versus CTG alone, Outcome 8 Caesarean section (elective…
Analysis 3.9
Comparison 3 Doppler ultrasound alone…
Analysis 3.9
Comparison 3 Doppler ultrasound alone versus CTG alone, Outcome 9 Caesarean section ‐…
Analysis 3.10
Comparison 3 Doppler ultrasound alone…
Analysis 3.10
Comparison 3 Doppler ultrasound alone versus CTG alone, Outcome 10 Caesarean section ‐…
Analysis 3.11
Comparison 3 Doppler ultrasound alone…
Analysis 3.11
Comparison 3 Doppler ultrasound alone versus CTG alone, Outcome 11 Spontaneous vaginal birth.
Analysis 3.12
Comparison 3 Doppler ultrasound alone…
Analysis 3.12
Comparison 3 Doppler ultrasound alone versus CTG alone, Outcome 12 Operative vaginal birth.
Analysis 3.13
Comparison 3 Doppler ultrasound alone…
Analysis 3.13
Comparison 3 Doppler ultrasound alone versus CTG alone, Outcome 13 Induction of labour.
Analysis 3.16
Comparison 3 Doppler ultrasound alone…
Analysis 3.16
Comparison 3 Doppler ultrasound alone versus CTG alone, Outcome 16 Infant requiring intubation/ventilation.
Analysis 3.17
Comparison 3 Doppler ultrasound alone…
Analysis 3.17
Comparison 3 Doppler ultrasound alone versus CTG alone, Outcome 17 Neonatal fitting/seizures.
Analysis 3.21
Comparison 3 Doppler ultrasound alone…
Analysis 3.21
Comparison 3 Doppler ultrasound alone versus CTG alone, Outcome 21 Neonatal admission to…
Analysis 3.28
Comparison 3 Doppler ultrasound alone…
Analysis 3.28
Comparison 3 Doppler ultrasound alone versus CTG alone, Outcome 28 Gestational age at…
Analysis 3.29
Comparison 3 Doppler ultrasound alone…
Analysis 3.29
Comparison 3 Doppler ultrasound alone versus CTG alone, Outcome 29 Birth weight.
Analysis 3.30
Comparison 3 Doppler ultrasound alone…
Analysis 3.30
Comparison 3 Doppler ultrasound alone versus CTG alone, Outcome 30 Length of infant…
Analysis 3.32
Comparison 3 Doppler ultrasound alone…
Analysis 3.32
Comparison 3 Doppler ultrasound alone versus CTG alone, Outcome 32 Antenatal admissions (not…
Analysis 3.33
Comparison 3 Doppler ultrasound alone…
Analysis 3.33
Comparison 3 Doppler ultrasound alone versus CTG alone, Outcome 33 Phototherapy for neonatal…
Analysis 3.39
Comparison 3 Doppler ultrasound alone…
Analysis 3.39
Comparison 3 Doppler ultrasound alone versus CTG alone, Outcome 39 Antenatal hospital stay.
Analysis 4.1
Comparison 4 Doppler ultrasound alone…
Analysis 4.1
Comparison 4 Doppler ultrasound alone versus CTG alone (all subgroups), Outcome 1 Any…
Analysis 5.1
Comparison 5 Doppler ultrasound versus…
Analysis 5.1
Comparison 5 Doppler ultrasound versus no Doppler ultrasound ‐ SGA/IUGR, Outcome 1 Any…
Analysis 6.1
Comparison 6 Doppler ultrasound alone…
Analysis 6.1
Comparison 6 Doppler ultrasound alone versus CTG ‐ SGA/IUGR, Outcome 1 Any perinatal…
Analysis 7.1
Comparison 7 Doppler ultrasound versus…
Analysis 7.1
Comparison 7 Doppler ultrasound versus no Doppler ultrasound ‐ in hypertension/pre‐eclampsia, Outcome 1…
Analysis 8.1
Comparison 8 Doppler ultrasound versus…
Analysis 8.1
Comparison 8 Doppler ultrasound versus CTG ‐ in hypertension/pre‐eclampsia, Outcome 1 Any perinatal…
Analysis 13.1
Comparison 13 Doppler ultrasound versus…
Analysis 13.1
Comparison 13 Doppler ultrasound versus no Doppler ultrasound ‐ previous pregnancy loss, Outcome…
Analysis 13.2
Comparison 13 Doppler ultrasound versus…
Analysis 13.2
Comparison 13 Doppler ultrasound versus no Doppler ultrasound ‐ previous pregnancy loss, Outcome…
- Fetal and umbilical Doppler ultrasound in high-risk pregnancies.Alfirevic Z, Stampalija T, Gyte GM. Alfirevic Z, et al. Cochrane Database Syst Rev. 2010 Jan 20;(1):CD007529. doi: 10.1002/14651858.CD007529.pub2. Cochrane Database Syst Rev. 2010. PMID: 20091637 Free PMC article. Updated. Review.
- Fetal and umbilical Doppler ultrasound in high-risk pregnancies.Alfirevic Z, Stampalija T, Dowswell T. Alfirevic Z, et al. Cochrane Database Syst Rev. 2017 Jun 13;6(6):CD007529. doi: 10.1002/14651858.CD007529.pub4. Cochrane Database Syst Rev. 2017. PMID: 28613398 Free PMC article. Review.
- Fetal and umbilical Doppler ultrasound in high-risk pregnancies.Alfirevic Z, Stampalija T, Gyte GM. Alfirevic Z, et al. Cochrane Database Syst Rev. 2010 Jan 20;(1):CD007529. doi: 10.1002/14651858.CD007529.pub2. Cochrane Database Syst Rev. 2010. PMID: 20091637 Free PMC article. Updated. Review.
- Intermittent auscultation (IA) of fetal heart rate in labour for fetal well-being.Martis R, Emilia O, Nurdiati DS, Brown J. Martis R, et al. Cochrane Database Syst Rev. 2017 Feb 13;2(2):CD008680. doi: 10.1002/14651858.CD008680.pub2. Cochrane Database Syst Rev. 2017. PMID: 28191626 Free PMC article. Review.
- Fetal and umbilical Doppler ultrasound in normal pregnancy.Alfirevic Z, Stampalija T, Medley N. Alfirevic Z, et al. Cochrane Database Syst Rev. 2015 Apr 15;2015(4):CD001450. doi: 10.1002/14651858.CD001450.pub4. Cochrane Database Syst Rev. 2015. PMID: 25874722 Free PMC article. Review.
- Induction of labour for improving birth outcomes for women at or beyond term.Middleton P, Shepherd E, Crowther CA. Middleton P, et al. Cochrane Database Syst Rev. 2018 May 9;5(5):CD004945. doi: 10.1002/14651858.CD004945.pub4. Cochrane Database Syst Rev. 2018. PMID: 29741208 Free PMC article. Updated. Review.
- The effects of aging and gestational month on uteroplacental vascular perfusion, and umbilical artery hemodynamics in pregnant jennies.Abdelnaby EA, Emam IA, El-Sherbiny HR, Fadl AM. Abdelnaby EA, et al. BMC Vet Res. 2022 Nov 15;18(1):404. doi: 10.1186/s12917-022-03499-8. BMC Vet Res. 2022. PMID: 36380376 Free PMC article.
- Systematic review evaluating the efficacy of the cerebroplacental ratio (CPR) in saving babies lives.Elmes C, Phillips R. Elmes C, et al. Ultrasound. 2022 Aug;30(3):184-193. doi: 10.1177/1742271X211048213. Epub 2021 Oct 19. Ultrasound. 2022. PMID: 35936964 Review.
- Antenatal Doppler screening for fetuses at risk of adverse outcomes: a multicountry cohort study of the prevalence of abnormal resistance index in low-risk pregnant women.Vannevel V, Vogel JP, Pattinson RC, Adanu R, Charantimath U, Goudar SS, Gwako G, Kavi A, Maya E, Osoti A, Pujar Y, Qureshi ZP, Rulisa S, Botha T, Oladapo OT. Vannevel V, et al. BMJ Open. 2022 Mar 16;12(3):e053622. doi: 10.1136/bmjopen-2021-053622. BMJ Open. 2022. PMID: 35296477 Free PMC article.
- Impact of umbilical cord length on fetal circulatory system by Doppler assessment.Olaya-C M, Vargas W, Martinez RA, Peñaloza IF, Sanchez M, Madariaga I, Aldana S, Bernal JE. Olaya-C M, et al. J Ultrasound. 2020 Dec;23(4):585-592. doi: 10.1007/s40477-020-00495-2. Epub 2020 Jul 11. J Ultrasound. 2020. PMID: 32654041 Free PMC article.
- Idiopathic Normal Pressure Hydrocephalus - What We Know.Baltatanu D, Berteanu M. Baltatanu D, et al. Maedica (Bucur). 2019 Jun;14(2):161-164. doi: 10.26574/maedica.2019.14.2.161. Maedica (Bucur). 2019. PMID: 31523298 Free PMC article.
- Meta-Analysis
- Research Support, Non-U.S. Gov't
- Review
- Systematic Review
- Cesarean Section / statistics & numerical data
- Female
- Fetal Monitoring / methods*
- Humans
- Labor, Induced / statistics & numerical data
- Perinatal Mortality
- Pregnancy
- Pregnancy, High-Risk*
- Randomized Controlled Trials as Topic
- Ultrasonography, Prenatal*
- Umbilical Cord / blood supply
- Umbilical Cord / diagnostic imaging*
- Full Text Sources
- Other Literature Sources
- Medical
NCBI Literature Resources
The PubMed wordmark and PubMed logo are registered trademarks of the U.S. Department of Health and Human Services (HHS). Unauthorized use of these marks is strictly prohibited.
National Library of Medicine
8600 Rockville Pike
Bethesda, MD 20894
![Analysis 1.8](https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/instance/6464948/bin/nCD007529-CMP-001-08.jpg)
![Analysis 1.9](https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/instance/6464948/bin/nCD007529-CMP-001-09.jpg)
![Analysis 1.10](https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/instance/6464948/bin/nCD007529-CMP-001-10.jpg)
![Analysis 1.11](https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/instance/6464948/bin/nCD007529-CMP-001-11.jpg)
![Analysis 1.12](https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/instance/6464948/bin/nCD007529-CMP-001-12.jpg)
![Analysis 1.13](https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/instance/6464948/bin/nCD007529-CMP-001-13.jpg)
![Analysis 1.16](https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/instance/6464948/bin/nCD007529-CMP-001-16.jpg)
![Analysis 1.17](https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/instance/6464948/bin/nCD007529-CMP-001-17.jpg)
![Analysis 1.18](https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/instance/6464948/bin/nCD007529-CMP-001-18.jpg)
![Analysis 1.19](https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/instance/6464948/bin/nCD007529-CMP-001-19.jpg)
![Analysis 1.21](https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/instance/6464948/bin/nCD007529-CMP-001-21.jpg)
![Analysis 1.22](https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/instance/6464948/bin/nCD007529-CMP-001-22.jpg)
![Analysis 1.23](https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/instance/6464948/bin/nCD007529-CMP-001-23.jpg)
![Analysis 1.28](https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/instance/6464948/bin/nCD007529-CMP-001-28.jpg)
![Analysis 1.29](https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/instance/6464948/bin/nCD007529-CMP-001-29.jpg)
![Analysis 1.30](https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/instance/6464948/bin/nCD007529-CMP-001-30.jpg)
![Analysis 1.31](https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/instance/6464948/bin/nCD007529-CMP-001-31.jpg)
Analysis 1.32
Comparison 1 Doppler ultrasound versus…
Analysis 1.32
Comparison 1 Doppler ultrasound versus no Doppler ultrasound, Outcome 32 Antenatal admissions (not…
Analysis 1.33
Comparison 1 Doppler ultrasound versus…
Analysis 1.33
Comparison 1 Doppler ultrasound versus no Doppler ultrasound, Outcome 33 Phototherapy for neonatal…
Analysis 1.34
Comparison 1 Doppler ultrasound versus…
Analysis 1.34
Comparison 1 Doppler ultrasound versus no Doppler ultrasound, Outcome 34 Abnormal neurological development…
Analysis 1.35
Comparison 1 Doppler ultrasound versus…
Analysis 1.35
Comparison 1 Doppler ultrasound versus no Doppler ultrasound, Outcome 35 Hospitalisation for IUGR…
Analysis 1.36
Comparison 1 Doppler ultrasound versus…
Analysis 1.36
Comparison 1 Doppler ultrasound versus no Doppler ultrasound, Outcome 36 Fetal distress in…
Analysis 1.37
Comparison 1 Doppler ultrasound versus…
Analysis 1.37
Comparison 1 Doppler ultrasound versus no Doppler ultrasound, Outcome 37 Birth weight
Analysis 1.38
Comparison 1 Doppler ultrasound versus…
Analysis 1.38
Comparison 1 Doppler ultrasound versus no Doppler ultrasound, Outcome 38 Periventricular leucomalacia (not…
Analysis 1.39
Comparison 1 Doppler ultrasound versus…
Analysis 1.39
Comparison 1 Doppler ultrasound versus no Doppler ultrasound, Outcome 39 Antenatal hospital stay.
Analysis 2.1
Comparison 2 Doppler ultrasound versus…
Analysis 2.1
Comparison 2 Doppler ultrasound versus no Doppler ultrasound (all subgroups), Outcome 1 Any…
Analysis 2.2
Comparison 2 Doppler ultrasound versus…
Analysis 2.2
Comparison 2 Doppler ultrasound versus no Doppler ultrasound (all subgroups), Outcome 2 Serious…
Analysis 3.1
Comparison 3 Doppler ultrasound alone…
Analysis 3.1
Comparison 3 Doppler ultrasound alone versus CTG alone, Outcome 1 Any perinatal death…
Analysis 3.3
Comparison 3 Doppler ultrasound alone…
Analysis 3.3
Comparison 3 Doppler ultrasound alone versus CTG alone, Outcome 3 Stillbirth.
Analysis 3.4
Comparison 3 Doppler ultrasound alone…
Analysis 3.4
Comparison 3 Doppler ultrasound alone versus CTG alone, Outcome 4 Neonatal death.
Analysis 3.5
Comparison 3 Doppler ultrasound alone…
Analysis 3.5
Comparison 3 Doppler ultrasound alone versus CTG alone, Outcome 5 Any potentially preventable…
Analysis 3.7
Comparison 3 Doppler ultrasound alone…
Analysis 3.7
Comparison 3 Doppler ultrasound alone versus CTG alone, Outcome 7 Apgar
Analysis 3.8
Comparison 3 Doppler ultrasound alone…
Analysis 3.8
Comparison 3 Doppler ultrasound alone versus CTG alone, Outcome 8 Caesarean section (elective…
Analysis 3.9
Comparison 3 Doppler ultrasound alone…
Analysis 3.9
Comparison 3 Doppler ultrasound alone versus CTG alone, Outcome 9 Caesarean section ‐…
Analysis 3.10
Comparison 3 Doppler ultrasound alone…
Analysis 3.10
Comparison 3 Doppler ultrasound alone versus CTG alone, Outcome 10 Caesarean section ‐…
Analysis 3.11
Comparison 3 Doppler ultrasound alone…
Analysis 3.11
Comparison 3 Doppler ultrasound alone versus CTG alone, Outcome 11 Spontaneous vaginal birth.
Analysis 3.12
Comparison 3 Doppler ultrasound alone…
Analysis 3.12
Comparison 3 Doppler ultrasound alone versus CTG alone, Outcome 12 Operative vaginal birth.
Analysis 3.13
Comparison 3 Doppler ultrasound alone…
Analysis 3.13
Comparison 3 Doppler ultrasound alone versus CTG alone, Outcome 13 Induction of labour.
Analysis 3.16
Comparison 3 Doppler ultrasound alone…
Analysis 3.16
Comparison 3 Doppler ultrasound alone versus CTG alone, Outcome 16 Infant requiring intubation/ventilation.
Analysis 3.17
Comparison 3 Doppler ultrasound alone…
Analysis 3.17
Comparison 3 Doppler ultrasound alone versus CTG alone, Outcome 17 Neonatal fitting/seizures.
Analysis 3.21
Comparison 3 Doppler ultrasound alone…
Analysis 3.21
Comparison 3 Doppler ultrasound alone versus CTG alone, Outcome 21 Neonatal admission to…
Analysis 3.28
Comparison 3 Doppler ultrasound alone…
Analysis 3.28
Comparison 3 Doppler ultrasound alone versus CTG alone, Outcome 28 Gestational age at…
Analysis 3.29
Comparison 3 Doppler ultrasound alone…
Analysis 3.29
Comparison 3 Doppler ultrasound alone versus CTG alone, Outcome 29 Birth weight.
Analysis 3.30
Comparison 3 Doppler ultrasound alone…
Analysis 3.30
Comparison 3 Doppler ultrasound alone versus CTG alone, Outcome 30 Length of infant…
Analysis 3.32
Comparison 3 Doppler ultrasound alone…
Analysis 3.32
Comparison 3 Doppler ultrasound alone versus CTG alone, Outcome 32 Antenatal admissions (not…
Analysis 3.33
Comparison 3 Doppler ultrasound alone…
Analysis 3.33
Comparison 3 Doppler ultrasound alone versus CTG alone, Outcome 33 Phototherapy for neonatal…
Analysis 3.39
Comparison 3 Doppler ultrasound alone…
Analysis 3.39
Comparison 3 Doppler ultrasound alone versus CTG alone, Outcome 39 Antenatal hospital stay.
Analysis 4.1
Comparison 4 Doppler ultrasound alone…
Analysis 4.1
Comparison 4 Doppler ultrasound alone versus CTG alone (all subgroups), Outcome 1 Any…
Analysis 5.1
Comparison 5 Doppler ultrasound versus…
Analysis 5.1
Comparison 5 Doppler ultrasound versus no Doppler ultrasound ‐ SGA/IUGR, Outcome 1 Any…
Analysis 6.1
Comparison 6 Doppler ultrasound alone…
Analysis 6.1
Comparison 6 Doppler ultrasound alone versus CTG ‐ SGA/IUGR, Outcome 1 Any perinatal…
Analysis 7.1
Comparison 7 Doppler ultrasound versus…
Analysis 7.1
Comparison 7 Doppler ultrasound versus no Doppler ultrasound ‐ in hypertension/pre‐eclampsia, Outcome 1…
Analysis 8.1
Comparison 8 Doppler ultrasound versus…
Analysis 8.1
Comparison 8 Doppler ultrasound versus CTG ‐ in hypertension/pre‐eclampsia, Outcome 1 Any perinatal…
Analysis 13.1
Comparison 13 Doppler ultrasound versus…
Analysis 13.1
Comparison 13 Doppler ultrasound versus no Doppler ultrasound ‐ previous pregnancy loss, Outcome…
Analysis 13.2
Comparison 13 Doppler ultrasound versus…
Analysis 13.2
Comparison 13 Doppler ultrasound versus no Doppler ultrasound ‐ previous pregnancy loss, Outcome…
- Fetal and umbilical Doppler ultrasound in high-risk pregnancies.Alfirevic Z, Stampalija T, Gyte GM. Alfirevic Z, et al. Cochrane Database Syst Rev. 2010 Jan 20;(1):CD007529. doi: 10.1002/14651858.CD007529.pub2. Cochrane Database Syst Rev. 2010. PMID: 20091637 Free PMC article. Updated. Review.
- Fetal and umbilical Doppler ultrasound in high-risk pregnancies.Alfirevic Z, Stampalija T, Dowswell T. Alfirevic Z, et al. Cochrane Database Syst Rev. 2017 Jun 13;6(6):CD007529. doi: 10.1002/14651858.CD007529.pub4. Cochrane Database Syst Rev. 2017. PMID: 28613398 Free PMC article. Review.
- Fetal and umbilical Doppler ultrasound in high-risk pregnancies.Alfirevic Z, Stampalija T, Gyte GM. Alfirevic Z, et al. Cochrane Database Syst Rev. 2010 Jan 20;(1):CD007529. doi: 10.1002/14651858.CD007529.pub2. Cochrane Database Syst Rev. 2010. PMID: 20091637 Free PMC article. Updated. Review.
- Intermittent auscultation (IA) of fetal heart rate in labour for fetal well-being.Martis R, Emilia O, Nurdiati DS, Brown J. Martis R, et al. Cochrane Database Syst Rev. 2017 Feb 13;2(2):CD008680. doi: 10.1002/14651858.CD008680.pub2. Cochrane Database Syst Rev. 2017. PMID: 28191626 Free PMC article. Review.
- Fetal and umbilical Doppler ultrasound in normal pregnancy.Alfirevic Z, Stampalija T, Medley N. Alfirevic Z, et al. Cochrane Database Syst Rev. 2015 Apr 15;2015(4):CD001450. doi: 10.1002/14651858.CD001450.pub4. Cochrane Database Syst Rev. 2015. PMID: 25874722 Free PMC article. Review.
- Induction of labour for improving birth outcomes for women at or beyond term.Middleton P, Shepherd E, Crowther CA. Middleton P, et al. Cochrane Database Syst Rev. 2018 May 9;5(5):CD004945. doi: 10.1002/14651858.CD004945.pub4. Cochrane Database Syst Rev. 2018. PMID: 29741208 Free PMC article. Updated. Review.
- The effects of aging and gestational month on uteroplacental vascular perfusion, and umbilical artery hemodynamics in pregnant jennies.Abdelnaby EA, Emam IA, El-Sherbiny HR, Fadl AM. Abdelnaby EA, et al. BMC Vet Res. 2022 Nov 15;18(1):404. doi: 10.1186/s12917-022-03499-8. BMC Vet Res. 2022. PMID: 36380376 Free PMC article.
- Systematic review evaluating the efficacy of the cerebroplacental ratio (CPR) in saving babies lives.Elmes C, Phillips R. Elmes C, et al. Ultrasound. 2022 Aug;30(3):184-193. doi: 10.1177/1742271X211048213. Epub 2021 Oct 19. Ultrasound. 2022. PMID: 35936964 Review.
- Antenatal Doppler screening for fetuses at risk of adverse outcomes: a multicountry cohort study of the prevalence of abnormal resistance index in low-risk pregnant women.Vannevel V, Vogel JP, Pattinson RC, Adanu R, Charantimath U, Goudar SS, Gwako G, Kavi A, Maya E, Osoti A, Pujar Y, Qureshi ZP, Rulisa S, Botha T, Oladapo OT. Vannevel V, et al. BMJ Open. 2022 Mar 16;12(3):e053622. doi: 10.1136/bmjopen-2021-053622. BMJ Open. 2022. PMID: 35296477 Free PMC article.
- Impact of umbilical cord length on fetal circulatory system by Doppler assessment.Olaya-C M, Vargas W, Martinez RA, Peñaloza IF, Sanchez M, Madariaga I, Aldana S, Bernal JE. Olaya-C M, et al. J Ultrasound. 2020 Dec;23(4):585-592. doi: 10.1007/s40477-020-00495-2. Epub 2020 Jul 11. J Ultrasound. 2020. PMID: 32654041 Free PMC article.
- Idiopathic Normal Pressure Hydrocephalus - What We Know.Baltatanu D, Berteanu M. Baltatanu D, et al. Maedica (Bucur). 2019 Jun;14(2):161-164. doi: 10.26574/maedica.2019.14.2.161. Maedica (Bucur). 2019. PMID: 31523298 Free PMC article.
- Meta-Analysis
- Research Support, Non-U.S. Gov't
- Review
- Systematic Review
- Cesarean Section / statistics & numerical data
- Female
- Fetal Monitoring / methods*
- Humans
- Labor, Induced / statistics & numerical data
- Perinatal Mortality
- Pregnancy
- Pregnancy, High-Risk*
- Randomized Controlled Trials as Topic
- Ultrasonography, Prenatal*
- Umbilical Cord / blood supply
- Umbilical Cord / diagnostic imaging*
- Full Text Sources
- Other Literature Sources
- Medical
NCBI Literature Resources
The PubMed wordmark and PubMed logo are registered trademarks of the U.S. Department of Health and Human Services (HHS). Unauthorized use of these marks is strictly prohibited.
National Library of Medicine
8600 Rockville Pike
Bethesda, MD 20894
![Analysis 1.32](https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/instance/6464948/bin/nCD007529-CMP-001-32.jpg)
![Analysis 1.33](https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/instance/6464948/bin/nCD007529-CMP-001-33.jpg)
![Analysis 1.34](https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/instance/6464948/bin/nCD007529-CMP-001-34.jpg)
![Analysis 1.35](https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/instance/6464948/bin/nCD007529-CMP-001-35.jpg)
![Analysis 1.36](https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/instance/6464948/bin/nCD007529-CMP-001-36.jpg)
![Analysis 1.37](https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/instance/6464948/bin/nCD007529-CMP-001-37.jpg)
Analysis 1.38
Comparison 1 Doppler ultrasound versus…
Analysis 1.38
Comparison 1 Doppler ultrasound versus no Doppler ultrasound, Outcome 38 Periventricular leucomalacia (not…
Analysis 1.39
Comparison 1 Doppler ultrasound versus…
Analysis 1.39
Comparison 1 Doppler ultrasound versus no Doppler ultrasound, Outcome 39 Antenatal hospital stay.
Analysis 2.1
Comparison 2 Doppler ultrasound versus…
Analysis 2.1
Comparison 2 Doppler ultrasound versus no Doppler ultrasound (all subgroups), Outcome 1 Any…
Analysis 2.2
Comparison 2 Doppler ultrasound versus…
Analysis 2.2
Comparison 2 Doppler ultrasound versus no Doppler ultrasound (all subgroups), Outcome 2 Serious…
Analysis 3.1
Comparison 3 Doppler ultrasound alone…
Analysis 3.1
Comparison 3 Doppler ultrasound alone versus CTG alone, Outcome 1 Any perinatal death…
Analysis 3.3
Comparison 3 Doppler ultrasound alone…
Analysis 3.3
Comparison 3 Doppler ultrasound alone versus CTG alone, Outcome 3 Stillbirth.
Analysis 3.4
Comparison 3 Doppler ultrasound alone…
Analysis 3.4
Comparison 3 Doppler ultrasound alone versus CTG alone, Outcome 4 Neonatal death.
Analysis 3.5
Comparison 3 Doppler ultrasound alone…
Analysis 3.5
Comparison 3 Doppler ultrasound alone versus CTG alone, Outcome 5 Any potentially preventable…
Analysis 3.7
Comparison 3 Doppler ultrasound alone…
Analysis 3.7
Comparison 3 Doppler ultrasound alone versus CTG alone, Outcome 7 Apgar
Analysis 3.8
Comparison 3 Doppler ultrasound alone…
Analysis 3.8
Comparison 3 Doppler ultrasound alone versus CTG alone, Outcome 8 Caesarean section (elective…
Analysis 3.9
Comparison 3 Doppler ultrasound alone…
Analysis 3.9
Comparison 3 Doppler ultrasound alone versus CTG alone, Outcome 9 Caesarean section ‐…
Analysis 3.10
Comparison 3 Doppler ultrasound alone…
Analysis 3.10
Comparison 3 Doppler ultrasound alone versus CTG alone, Outcome 10 Caesarean section ‐…
Analysis 3.11
Comparison 3 Doppler ultrasound alone…
Analysis 3.11
Comparison 3 Doppler ultrasound alone versus CTG alone, Outcome 11 Spontaneous vaginal birth.
Analysis 3.12
Comparison 3 Doppler ultrasound alone…
Analysis 3.12
Comparison 3 Doppler ultrasound alone versus CTG alone, Outcome 12 Operative vaginal birth.
Analysis 3.13
Comparison 3 Doppler ultrasound alone…
Analysis 3.13
Comparison 3 Doppler ultrasound alone versus CTG alone, Outcome 13 Induction of labour.
Analysis 3.16
Comparison 3 Doppler ultrasound alone…
Analysis 3.16
Comparison 3 Doppler ultrasound alone versus CTG alone, Outcome 16 Infant requiring intubation/ventilation.
Analysis 3.17
Comparison 3 Doppler ultrasound alone…
Analysis 3.17
Comparison 3 Doppler ultrasound alone versus CTG alone, Outcome 17 Neonatal fitting/seizures.
Analysis 3.21
Comparison 3 Doppler ultrasound alone…
Analysis 3.21
Comparison 3 Doppler ultrasound alone versus CTG alone, Outcome 21 Neonatal admission to…
Analysis 3.28
Comparison 3 Doppler ultrasound alone…
Analysis 3.28
Comparison 3 Doppler ultrasound alone versus CTG alone, Outcome 28 Gestational age at…
Analysis 3.29
Comparison 3 Doppler ultrasound alone…
Analysis 3.29
Comparison 3 Doppler ultrasound alone versus CTG alone, Outcome 29 Birth weight.
Analysis 3.30
Comparison 3 Doppler ultrasound alone…
Analysis 3.30
Comparison 3 Doppler ultrasound alone versus CTG alone, Outcome 30 Length of infant…
Analysis 3.32
Comparison 3 Doppler ultrasound alone…
Analysis 3.32
Comparison 3 Doppler ultrasound alone versus CTG alone, Outcome 32 Antenatal admissions (not…
Analysis 3.33
Comparison 3 Doppler ultrasound alone…
Analysis 3.33
Comparison 3 Doppler ultrasound alone versus CTG alone, Outcome 33 Phototherapy for neonatal…
Analysis 3.39
Comparison 3 Doppler ultrasound alone…
Analysis 3.39
Comparison 3 Doppler ultrasound alone versus CTG alone, Outcome 39 Antenatal hospital stay.
Analysis 4.1
Comparison 4 Doppler ultrasound alone…
Analysis 4.1
Comparison 4 Doppler ultrasound alone versus CTG alone (all subgroups), Outcome 1 Any…
Analysis 5.1
Comparison 5 Doppler ultrasound versus…
Analysis 5.1
Comparison 5 Doppler ultrasound versus no Doppler ultrasound ‐ SGA/IUGR, Outcome 1 Any…
Analysis 6.1
Comparison 6 Doppler ultrasound alone…
Analysis 6.1
Comparison 6 Doppler ultrasound alone versus CTG ‐ SGA/IUGR, Outcome 1 Any perinatal…
Analysis 7.1
Comparison 7 Doppler ultrasound versus…
Analysis 7.1
Comparison 7 Doppler ultrasound versus no Doppler ultrasound ‐ in hypertension/pre‐eclampsia, Outcome 1…
Analysis 8.1
Comparison 8 Doppler ultrasound versus…
Analysis 8.1
Comparison 8 Doppler ultrasound versus CTG ‐ in hypertension/pre‐eclampsia, Outcome 1 Any perinatal…
Analysis 13.1
Comparison 13 Doppler ultrasound versus…
Analysis 13.1
Comparison 13 Doppler ultrasound versus no Doppler ultrasound ‐ previous pregnancy loss, Outcome…
Analysis 13.2
Comparison 13 Doppler ultrasound versus…
Analysis 13.2
Comparison 13 Doppler ultrasound versus no Doppler ultrasound ‐ previous pregnancy loss, Outcome…
- Fetal and umbilical Doppler ultrasound in high-risk pregnancies.Alfirevic Z, Stampalija T, Gyte GM. Alfirevic Z, et al. Cochrane Database Syst Rev. 2010 Jan 20;(1):CD007529. doi: 10.1002/14651858.CD007529.pub2. Cochrane Database Syst Rev. 2010. PMID: 20091637 Free PMC article. Updated. Review.
- Fetal and umbilical Doppler ultrasound in high-risk pregnancies.Alfirevic Z, Stampalija T, Dowswell T. Alfirevic Z, et al. Cochrane Database Syst Rev. 2017 Jun 13;6(6):CD007529. doi: 10.1002/14651858.CD007529.pub4. Cochrane Database Syst Rev. 2017. PMID: 28613398 Free PMC article. Review.
- Fetal and umbilical Doppler ultrasound in high-risk pregnancies.Alfirevic Z, Stampalija T, Gyte GM. Alfirevic Z, et al. Cochrane Database Syst Rev. 2010 Jan 20;(1):CD007529. doi: 10.1002/14651858.CD007529.pub2. Cochrane Database Syst Rev. 2010. PMID: 20091637 Free PMC article. Updated. Review.
- Intermittent auscultation (IA) of fetal heart rate in labour for fetal well-being.Martis R, Emilia O, Nurdiati DS, Brown J. Martis R, et al. Cochrane Database Syst Rev. 2017 Feb 13;2(2):CD008680. doi: 10.1002/14651858.CD008680.pub2. Cochrane Database Syst Rev. 2017. PMID: 28191626 Free PMC article. Review.
- Fetal and umbilical Doppler ultrasound in normal pregnancy.Alfirevic Z, Stampalija T, Medley N. Alfirevic Z, et al. Cochrane Database Syst Rev. 2015 Apr 15;2015(4):CD001450. doi: 10.1002/14651858.CD001450.pub4. Cochrane Database Syst Rev. 2015. PMID: 25874722 Free PMC article. Review.
- Induction of labour for improving birth outcomes for women at or beyond term.Middleton P, Shepherd E, Crowther CA. Middleton P, et al. Cochrane Database Syst Rev. 2018 May 9;5(5):CD004945. doi: 10.1002/14651858.CD004945.pub4. Cochrane Database Syst Rev. 2018. PMID: 29741208 Free PMC article. Updated. Review.
- The effects of aging and gestational month on uteroplacental vascular perfusion, and umbilical artery hemodynamics in pregnant jennies.Abdelnaby EA, Emam IA, El-Sherbiny HR, Fadl AM. Abdelnaby EA, et al. BMC Vet Res. 2022 Nov 15;18(1):404. doi: 10.1186/s12917-022-03499-8. BMC Vet Res. 2022. PMID: 36380376 Free PMC article.
- Systematic review evaluating the efficacy of the cerebroplacental ratio (CPR) in saving babies lives.Elmes C, Phillips R. Elmes C, et al. Ultrasound. 2022 Aug;30(3):184-193. doi: 10.1177/1742271X211048213. Epub 2021 Oct 19. Ultrasound. 2022. PMID: 35936964 Review.
- Antenatal Doppler screening for fetuses at risk of adverse outcomes: a multicountry cohort study of the prevalence of abnormal resistance index in low-risk pregnant women.Vannevel V, Vogel JP, Pattinson RC, Adanu R, Charantimath U, Goudar SS, Gwako G, Kavi A, Maya E, Osoti A, Pujar Y, Qureshi ZP, Rulisa S, Botha T, Oladapo OT. Vannevel V, et al. BMJ Open. 2022 Mar 16;12(3):e053622. doi: 10.1136/bmjopen-2021-053622. BMJ Open. 2022. PMID: 35296477 Free PMC article.
- Impact of umbilical cord length on fetal circulatory system by Doppler assessment.Olaya-C M, Vargas W, Martinez RA, Peñaloza IF, Sanchez M, Madariaga I, Aldana S, Bernal JE. Olaya-C M, et al. J Ultrasound. 2020 Dec;23(4):585-592. doi: 10.1007/s40477-020-00495-2. Epub 2020 Jul 11. J Ultrasound. 2020. PMID: 32654041 Free PMC article.
- Idiopathic Normal Pressure Hydrocephalus - What We Know.Baltatanu D, Berteanu M. Baltatanu D, et al. Maedica (Bucur). 2019 Jun;14(2):161-164. doi: 10.26574/maedica.2019.14.2.161. Maedica (Bucur). 2019. PMID: 31523298 Free PMC article.
- Meta-Analysis
- Research Support, Non-U.S. Gov't
- Review
- Systematic Review
- Cesarean Section / statistics & numerical data
- Female
- Fetal Monitoring / methods*
- Humans
- Labor, Induced / statistics & numerical data
- Perinatal Mortality
- Pregnancy
- Pregnancy, High-Risk*
- Randomized Controlled Trials as Topic
- Ultrasonography, Prenatal*
- Umbilical Cord / blood supply
- Umbilical Cord / diagnostic imaging*
- Full Text Sources
- Other Literature Sources
- Medical
![Analysis 1.38](https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/instance/6464948/bin/nCD007529-CMP-001-38.jpg)
![Analysis 1.39](https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/instance/6464948/bin/nCD007529-CMP-001-39.jpg)
![Analysis 2.1](https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/instance/6464948/bin/nCD007529-CMP-002-01.jpg)
![Analysis 2.2](https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/instance/6464948/bin/nCD007529-CMP-002-02.jpg)
![Analysis 3.1](https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/instance/6464948/bin/nCD007529-CMP-003-01.jpg)
![Analysis 3.3](https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/instance/6464948/bin/nCD007529-CMP-003-03.jpg)
![Analysis 3.4](https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/instance/6464948/bin/nCD007529-CMP-003-04.jpg)
![Analysis 3.5](https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/instance/6464948/bin/nCD007529-CMP-003-05.jpg)
![Analysis 3.7](https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/instance/6464948/bin/nCD007529-CMP-003-07.jpg)
Analysis 3.8
Comparison 3 Doppler ultrasound alone…
Analysis 3.8
Comparison 3 Doppler ultrasound alone versus CTG alone, Outcome 8 Caesarean section (elective…
Analysis 3.9
Comparison 3 Doppler ultrasound alone…
Analysis 3.9
Comparison 3 Doppler ultrasound alone versus CTG alone, Outcome 9 Caesarean section ‐…
Analysis 3.10
Comparison 3 Doppler ultrasound alone…
Analysis 3.10
Comparison 3 Doppler ultrasound alone versus CTG alone, Outcome 10 Caesarean section ‐…
Analysis 3.11
Comparison 3 Doppler ultrasound alone…
Analysis 3.11
Comparison 3 Doppler ultrasound alone versus CTG alone, Outcome 11 Spontaneous vaginal birth.
Analysis 3.12
Comparison 3 Doppler ultrasound alone…
Analysis 3.12
Comparison 3 Doppler ultrasound alone versus CTG alone, Outcome 12 Operative vaginal birth.
Analysis 3.13
Comparison 3 Doppler ultrasound alone…
Analysis 3.13
Comparison 3 Doppler ultrasound alone versus CTG alone, Outcome 13 Induction of labour.
Analysis 3.16
Comparison 3 Doppler ultrasound alone…
Analysis 3.16
Comparison 3 Doppler ultrasound alone versus CTG alone, Outcome 16 Infant requiring intubation/ventilation.
Analysis 3.17
Comparison 3 Doppler ultrasound alone…
Analysis 3.17
Comparison 3 Doppler ultrasound alone versus CTG alone, Outcome 17 Neonatal fitting/seizures.
Analysis 3.21
Comparison 3 Doppler ultrasound alone…
Analysis 3.21
Comparison 3 Doppler ultrasound alone versus CTG alone, Outcome 21 Neonatal admission to…
Analysis 3.28
Comparison 3 Doppler ultrasound alone…
Analysis 3.28
Comparison 3 Doppler ultrasound alone versus CTG alone, Outcome 28 Gestational age at…
Analysis 3.29
Comparison 3 Doppler ultrasound alone…
Analysis 3.29
Comparison 3 Doppler ultrasound alone versus CTG alone, Outcome 29 Birth weight.
Analysis 3.30
Comparison 3 Doppler ultrasound alone…
Analysis 3.30
Comparison 3 Doppler ultrasound alone versus CTG alone, Outcome 30 Length of infant…
Analysis 3.32
Comparison 3 Doppler ultrasound alone…
Analysis 3.32
Comparison 3 Doppler ultrasound alone versus CTG alone, Outcome 32 Antenatal admissions (not…
Analysis 3.33
Comparison 3 Doppler ultrasound alone…
Analysis 3.33
Comparison 3 Doppler ultrasound alone versus CTG alone, Outcome 33 Phototherapy for neonatal…
Analysis 3.39
Comparison 3 Doppler ultrasound alone…
Analysis 3.39
Comparison 3 Doppler ultrasound alone versus CTG alone, Outcome 39 Antenatal hospital stay.
Analysis 4.1
Comparison 4 Doppler ultrasound alone…
Analysis 4.1
Comparison 4 Doppler ultrasound alone versus CTG alone (all subgroups), Outcome 1 Any…
Analysis 5.1
Comparison 5 Doppler ultrasound versus…
Analysis 5.1
Comparison 5 Doppler ultrasound versus no Doppler ultrasound ‐ SGA/IUGR, Outcome 1 Any…
Analysis 6.1
Comparison 6 Doppler ultrasound alone…
Analysis 6.1
Comparison 6 Doppler ultrasound alone versus CTG ‐ SGA/IUGR, Outcome 1 Any perinatal…
Analysis 7.1
Comparison 7 Doppler ultrasound versus…
Analysis 7.1
Comparison 7 Doppler ultrasound versus no Doppler ultrasound ‐ in hypertension/pre‐eclampsia, Outcome 1…
Analysis 8.1
Comparison 8 Doppler ultrasound versus…
Analysis 8.1
Comparison 8 Doppler ultrasound versus CTG ‐ in hypertension/pre‐eclampsia, Outcome 1 Any perinatal…
Analysis 13.1
Comparison 13 Doppler ultrasound versus…
Analysis 13.1
Comparison 13 Doppler ultrasound versus no Doppler ultrasound ‐ previous pregnancy loss, Outcome…
Analysis 13.2
Comparison 13 Doppler ultrasound versus…
Analysis 13.2
Comparison 13 Doppler ultrasound versus no Doppler ultrasound ‐ previous pregnancy loss, Outcome…
![Analysis 3.8](https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/instance/6464948/bin/nCD007529-CMP-003-08.jpg)
![Analysis 3.9](https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/instance/6464948/bin/nCD007529-CMP-003-09.jpg)
![Analysis 3.10](https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/instance/6464948/bin/nCD007529-CMP-003-10.jpg)
![Analysis 3.11](https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/instance/6464948/bin/nCD007529-CMP-003-11.jpg)
![Analysis 3.12](https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/instance/6464948/bin/nCD007529-CMP-003-12.jpg)
![Analysis 3.13](https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/instance/6464948/bin/nCD007529-CMP-003-13.jpg)
![Analysis 3.16](https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/instance/6464948/bin/nCD007529-CMP-003-16.jpg)
![Analysis 3.17](https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/instance/6464948/bin/nCD007529-CMP-003-17.jpg)
![Analysis 3.21](https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/instance/6464948/bin/nCD007529-CMP-003-21.jpg)
![Analysis 3.28](https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/instance/6464948/bin/nCD007529-CMP-003-28.jpg)
![Analysis 3.29](https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/instance/6464948/bin/nCD007529-CMP-003-29.jpg)
![Analysis 3.30](https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/instance/6464948/bin/nCD007529-CMP-003-30.jpg)
![Analysis 3.32](https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/instance/6464948/bin/nCD007529-CMP-003-32.jpg)
![Analysis 3.33](https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/instance/6464948/bin/nCD007529-CMP-003-33.jpg)
![Analysis 3.39](https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/instance/6464948/bin/nCD007529-CMP-003-39.jpg)
![Analysis 4.1](https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/instance/6464948/bin/nCD007529-CMP-004-01.jpg)
![Analysis 5.1](https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/instance/6464948/bin/nCD007529-CMP-005-01.jpg)
![Analysis 6.1](https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/instance/6464948/bin/nCD007529-CMP-006-01.jpg)
![Analysis 7.1](https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/instance/6464948/bin/nCD007529-CMP-007-01.jpg)
![Analysis 8.1](https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/instance/6464948/bin/nCD007529-CMP-008-01.jpg)
![Analysis 13.1](https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/instance/6464948/bin/nCD007529-CMP-013-01.jpg)
![Analysis 13.2](https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/instance/6464948/bin/nCD007529-CMP-013-02.jpg)
Source: PubMed