PECULIARITIES OF PRENATAL ULTRASOUND SCREENING IN PREGNANT WOMEN WITH OVERWEIGHT AND OBESITY
https://doi.org/10.35266/2949-3447-2025-3-1
Abstract
Overweight and obesity are common problems among women of reproductive age, affecting their health and fetal development. Metabolic disorders caused by these conditions complicate prenatal diagnosis, reducing the informative value of ultrasound examinations. The paper presents a literature review dedicated to improving prenatal screening methods in obese pregnant women. It presents technical difficulties, such as reduced visualization quality of fetal anatomical structures due to an increased subcutaneous tissue, and suggests ways to improve diagnosis, including the use of high-precision devices and individual selection of ultrasound parameters. The optimal timing of ultrasound examination and its impact on the results are reviewed. The conclusion emphasizes the importance of further research for optimization of the process of prenatal diagnosis in women with obesity.
About the Authors
E. V. Kudryavtseva
Ural Institute of Health Management named after A. B. Blokhin, Yekaterinburg
Russian Federation
Russian Federation
Doctor of Sciences (Medicine), Docent, Professor
S. E. Benihis
Urals State Medical University, Yekaterinburg
Russian Federation
Russian Federation
Assistant Professor
References
1. Poniedziałek-Czajkowska E., Mierzyński R., Leszczyńska-Gorzelak B. Preeclampsia and obesity – The preventive role of exercise // International Journal of Environmental Research and Public Health. 2023. Vol. 20, no. 2. P. 1–39. https://doi.org/10.3390/ijerph20021267.
2. Purdy J. C., Shatzel J. J. The hematologic consequences of obesity // European Journal of Haematology. 2021. Vol. 106, no. 3. P. 306–319. https://doi.org/10.1111/ejh.13560.
3. Paredes C., Hsu R. C., Tong A. et al. Obesity and pregnancy // Neoreviews. 2021. Vol. 22, no. 2. P. e78–e87. https://doi.org/10.1542/ neo.22-2-e78.
4. Prodan N. C., Schmidt M., Hoopmann M. et al. Obesity in prenatal medicine: A game changer? // Archives of Gynecology and Obstetrics. 2024. Vol. 309. P. 961–974. https://doi.org/10.1007/ s00404-023-07251-x.
5. Catalano P. M., Shankar K. Obesity and pregnancy: Mechanisms of short term and long term adverse consequences for mother and child // British Medical Journal. 2017. Vol. 356. https://doi. org/10.1136/bmj.j1.
6. Giouleka S., Tsakiridis I., Koutsouki G. et al. Obesity in pregnancy: A comprehensive review of influential guidelines // Obstetrical & Gynecological Survey. 2023. Vol. 78, no. 1. P. 50–68. https://doi. org/10.1097/ogx.0000000000001091.
7. Tsai P.-J. S., Loichinger M., Zalud I. Obesity and the challenges of ultrasound fetal abnormality diagnosis // Best Practice & Research Clinical Obstetrics & Gynaecology. 2015. Vol. 29, no. 3. P. 320–327. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.bpobgyn.2014.08.011.
8. Preen C., Munn Z., Raju S. et al. Second trimester ultrasound detection of fetal anomalies in the obese obstetrical population: A systematic review protocol // JBI Database of Systematic Reviews and Implementation Reports. 2018. Vol. 16, no. 2. P. 328– 335. https://doi.org/10.11124/jbisrir-2017-003505.
9. Liat S., Cabero L., Hod M. et al. Obesity in obstetrics // Best Practice & Research Clinical Obstetrics & Gynaecology. 2015. Vol. 29, no. 1. P. 79–90. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.bpobgyn.2014.05.010.
10. Smith G. A critical review of the Cochrane meta‐analysis of routine late‐pregnancy ultrasound // BJOG: An International Journal of Obstetrics and Gynaecology. 2021. Vol. 128, no. 2. P. 207–213. https://doi.org/10.1111/1471-0528.16386.
11. Медведев М. В., Новикова И. В. Врожденные пороки сердца: пренатальная диагностика и патоморфология : моногр. М. : Реал Тайм, 2022. 576 с.
12. Машинец Н. В., Демидов В. Н., Дорофеева Е. И. и др. Пренатальная ультразвуковая диагностика и исходы врожденных пороков легкого у плода. Опыт Центра за 10-летний период: 363 наблюдения // Акушерство и гинекология. 2021. № 9. С. 72–80. https://dx.doi.org/10.18565/aig.2021.9.72-80.
13. Kudryavtseva E. V., Kovalev V. V., Baranov I. I. et al. Experience in the application of non-invasive prenatal screening for the detection of down syndrome in Russia: A retrospective cohort study // International Journal of Women’s Health and Reproduction Sciences. 2022. Vol. 10, no. 4. P. 180–185. https://doi.org/10.15296/ijwhr.2022.31.
14. Karim J. N., Roberts N. W., Salomon L. J. et al. Systematic review of first‐trimester ultrasound screening for detection of fetal structural anomalies and factors that affect screening performance // Ultrasound in Obstetrics & Gynecology. 2017. Vol. 50, no. 4. P. 429–441. https://doi.org/10.1002/uog.17246.
15. Bromley B., Platt L. D. First-trimester ultrasound screening in routine obstetric practice // Obstetrics & Gynecology. 2024. Vol. 143, no. 6. P. 730–744. https://doi.org/10.1097/aog.0000000000005594.
16. Medjedovic E., Kurjak A. The importance of Doppler analysis of uterine circulation in pregnancy for a better understanding of preeclampsia // Medical Archives. 2021. Vol. 75, no. 6. P. 424–430. https://doi.org/10.5455/medarh.2021.75.424-430.
17. Chaemsaithong P., Sahota D. S., Poon L. C. First trimester preeclampsia screening and prediction. // American Journal of Obstetrics & Gynecology. 2022. Vol. 226, no. 2S. P. S1071–S1097.E2.https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ajog.2020.07.020.
18. Дектярев А. А., Кудрявцева Е. В., Ковалев В. В. Патогенетические ассоциации показателей пренатального скрининга первого триместра беременности с задержкой роста плода // Пермский медицинский журнал. 2022. Т. 39, № 1. С. 11–20.
19. Muminova K. T., Nagoev T. M., Khodzhaeva Z. S. et al. P-056. Profound changes in hemodynamics proving late-onset PE being of maternal origin // Pregnancy Hypertension. 2021. Vol. 25, suppl. 1. P. e47. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.preghy.2021.07.091.
20. Lee N. M. W., Chaemsaithong P., Poon L. C. Prediction of preeclampsia in asymptomatic women // Best Practice & Research Clinical Obstetrics & Gynaecology. 2024. Vol. 92. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.bpobgyn.2023.102436.
21. de Ganzo Suárez T., de Paco Matallana C., Plasencia W. Spiral, uterine artery doppler and placental ultrasound in relation to preeclampsia // Best Practice & Research Clinical Obstetrics & Gynaecology. 2024. Vol. 92. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.bpobgyn.2023.102426.
22. Chang K.-J., Seow K.-M., Chen K.-H. Preeclampsia: Recent advances in predicting, preventing, and managing the maternal and fetal life-threatening condition // International Journal of Environmental Research and Public Health. 2023. Vol. 20, no. 4. https://doi.org/10.3390/ijerph20042994.
23. Pedroso M. A., Palmer K. R., Hodges R. J. et al. Uterine artery Doppler in screening for preeclampsia and fetal growth restriction // Revista Brasileira de Ginecologia e Obstetrícia. 2018. Vol. 40, no. 5. P. 287–293. https://doi.org/10.1055/s-0038-1660777.
24. Puissegur A., Salesse N., Delabaere A. et al. Impact of ultrasound speed choice on the quality of the second-trimester fetal ultrasound examination in obese women // Diagnostic and Interventional Imaging. 2021. Vol. 102, no. 2. P. 109–113. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.diii.2020.06.007.
25. Chauveau B., Auclair C., Legrand A. et al. Improving image quality of mid‐trimester fetal sonography in obese women: Role of ultrasound propagation velocity // Ultrasound in Obstetrics & Gynecology. 2018. Vol. 52, no. 6. P. 769–775. https://doi.org/10.1002/uog.19015.
26. Delabaere A., Chauveau B., Lémery D. et al. Protocol for the e-POWUS Project: Multicentre blinded-randomised controlled trial of ultrasound speed choice to improve sonography quality in pregnant women with obesity // British Medical Journal Open. 2021. Vol. 11, no. 9. https://doi.org/10.1136/bmjopen-2020-038684.
27. Siddiqui F., Kalache K., Ahmed B. et al. Challenges of prenatal diagnosis in obese pregnant women // Best Practice & Research Clinical Obstetrics & Gynaecology. 2024. Vol. 95. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.bpobgyn.2024.102470.
28. Harper L. M., Jauk V. C., Owen J. et al. The utility of ultrasound surveillance of fluid and growth in obese women // American Journal of Obstetrics & Gynecology. 2014. Vol. 211, no. 5. P. 524.e1–524.e8.https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ajog.2014.04.028.
29. Harper L. M., Wood S. L., Jenkins S. M. et al. The performance of first-trimester anatomy scan: A decision analysis // American Journal of Perinatology. 2016. Vol. 33, no. 10. P. 957–965. https://doi.org/10.1055/s-0036-1579652.
30. Hunter L., Panagiotopoulou O., Mulholland J. et al. Impact of maternal body mass index (BMI) and the challenges of fetal echocardiography// Public Health. 2024. Vol. 233. P. 22–24. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.puhe.2024.04.020.
31. Gupta V. K., Adams J. H., Heiser T. et al. Detailed fetal anatomic ultrasound examination duration and association with body mass index // Obstetrics & Gynecology. 2019. Vol. 134, no. 4. P. 774–780. https://doi.org/10.1097/aog.0000000000003489.
32. Об утверждении перечня медицинских показаний для искусственного прерывания беременности : приказ Министерства здравоохранения и социального развития РФ от 03.12.2007 № 736 (с изм. и доп.). Доступ из СПС «Гарант».
33. Саввина О. В. Проблема моральной оправданности абортов в мусульманской культуре в контексте глобализации // Человек и культура. 2015. № 2. С. 96–109. https://doi.org/10.7256/2409- 8744.2015.2.15114.
34. Основы социальной концепции Русской Православной Церкви. URL: http://www.patriarchia.ru/db/text/419128.html (дата обращения: 15.04.2025).
35. Toscano M., Grace D., Pressman E. K. et al. Does transvaginal ultrasound at 13–15 weeks improve anatomic survey completion rates in obese gravidas? // The Journal of Maternal-Fetal & Neonatal Medicine. 2021. Vol. 34, no. 5. P. 803–809. https://doi.org/10.1080/14767058.2019.1618825.
Review
For citations:
Kudryavtseva E.V., Benihis S.E. PECULIARITIES OF PRENATAL ULTRASOUND SCREENING IN PREGNANT WOMEN WITH OVERWEIGHT AND OBESITY. Vestnik SurGU. Meditsina. 2025;18(3):8–13. (In Russ.) https://doi.org/10.35266/2949-3447-2025-3-1
Views:
16
Email this article 
