Journal of Clinical and Diagnostic Research, ISSN - 0973 - 709X

Users Online : 52272

AbstractMaterial and MethodsResultsDiscussionConclusionAcknowledgementReferencesDOI and Others
Article in PDF How to Cite Citation Manager Readers' Comments (0) Audio Visual Article Statistics Link to PUBMED Print this Article Send to a Friend
Advertisers Access Statistics Resources

Dr Mohan Z Mani

"Thank you very much for having published my article in record time.I would like to compliment you and your entire staff for your promptness, courtesy, and willingness to be customer friendly, which is quite unusual.I was given your reference by a colleague in pathology,and was able to directly phone your editorial office for clarifications.I would particularly like to thank the publication managers and the Assistant Editor who were following up my article. I would also like to thank you for adjusting the money I paid initially into payment for my modified article,and refunding the balance.
I wish all success to your journal and look forward to sending you any suitable similar article in future"



Dr Mohan Z Mani,
Professor & Head,
Department of Dermatolgy,
Believers Church Medical College,
Thiruvalla, Kerala
On Sep 2018




Prof. Somashekhar Nimbalkar

"Over the last few years, we have published our research regularly in Journal of Clinical and Diagnostic Research. Having published in more than 20 high impact journals over the last five years including several high impact ones and reviewing articles for even more journals across my fields of interest, we value our published work in JCDR for their high standards in publishing scientific articles. The ease of submission, the rapid reviews in under a month, the high quality of their reviewers and keen attention to the final process of proofs and publication, ensure that there are no mistakes in the final article. We have been asked clarifications on several occasions and have been happy to provide them and it exemplifies the commitment to quality of the team at JCDR."



Prof. Somashekhar Nimbalkar
Head, Department of Pediatrics, Pramukhswami Medical College, Karamsad
Chairman, Research Group, Charutar Arogya Mandal, Karamsad
National Joint Coordinator - Advanced IAP NNF NRP Program
Ex-Member, Governing Body, National Neonatology Forum, New Delhi
Ex-President - National Neonatology Forum Gujarat State Chapter
Department of Pediatrics, Pramukhswami Medical College, Karamsad, Anand, Gujarat.
On Sep 2018




Dr. Kalyani R

"Journal of Clinical and Diagnostic Research is at present a well-known Indian originated scientific journal which started with a humble beginning. I have been associated with this journal since many years. I appreciate the Editor, Dr. Hemant Jain, for his constant effort in bringing up this journal to the present status right from the scratch. The journal is multidisciplinary. It encourages in publishing the scientific articles from postgraduates and also the beginners who start their career. At the same time the journal also caters for the high quality articles from specialty and super-specialty researchers. Hence it provides a platform for the scientist and researchers to publish. The other aspect of it is, the readers get the information regarding the most recent developments in science which can be used for teaching, research, treating patients and to some extent take preventive measures against certain diseases. The journal is contributing immensely to the society at national and international level."



Dr Kalyani R
Professor and Head
Department of Pathology
Sri Devaraj Urs Medical College
Sri Devaraj Urs Academy of Higher Education and Research , Kolar, Karnataka
On Sep 2018




Dr. Saumya Navit

"As a peer-reviewed journal, the Journal of Clinical and Diagnostic Research provides an opportunity to researchers, scientists and budding professionals to explore the developments in the field of medicine and dentistry and their varied specialities, thus extending our view on biological diversities of living species in relation to medicine.
‘Knowledge is treasure of a wise man.’ The free access of this journal provides an immense scope of learning for the both the old and the young in field of medicine and dentistry as well. The multidisciplinary nature of the journal makes it a better platform to absorb all that is being researched and developed. The publication process is systematic and professional. Online submission, publication and peer reviewing makes it a user-friendly journal.
As an experienced dentist and an academician, I proudly recommend this journal to the dental fraternity as a good quality open access platform for rapid communication of their cutting-edge research progress and discovery.
I wish JCDR a great success and I hope that journal will soar higher with the passing time."



Dr Saumya Navit
Professor and Head
Department of Pediatric Dentistry
Saraswati Dental College
Lucknow
On Sep 2018




Dr. Arunava Biswas

"My sincere attachment with JCDR as an author as well as reviewer is a learning experience . Their systematic approach in publication of article in various categories is really praiseworthy.
Their prompt and timely response to review's query and the manner in which they have set the reviewing process helps in extracting the best possible scientific writings for publication.
It's a honour and pride to be a part of the JCDR team. My very best wishes to JCDR and hope it will sparkle up above the sky as a high indexed journal in near future."



Dr. Arunava Biswas
MD, DM (Clinical Pharmacology)
Assistant Professor
Department of Pharmacology
Calcutta National Medical College & Hospital , Kolkata




Dr. C.S. Ramesh Babu
" Journal of Clinical and Diagnostic Research (JCDR) is a multi-specialty medical and dental journal publishing high quality research articles in almost all branches of medicine. The quality of printing of figures and tables is excellent and comparable to any International journal. An added advantage is nominal publication charges and monthly issue of the journal and more chances of an article being accepted for publication. Moreover being a multi-specialty journal an article concerning a particular specialty has a wider reach of readers of other related specialties also. As an author and reviewer for several years I find this Journal most suitable and highly recommend this Journal."
Best regards,
C.S. Ramesh Babu,
Associate Professor of Anatomy,
Muzaffarnagar Medical College,
Muzaffarnagar.
On Aug 2018




Dr. Arundhathi. S
"Journal of Clinical and Diagnostic Research (JCDR) is a reputed peer reviewed journal and is constantly involved in publishing high quality research articles related to medicine. Its been a great pleasure to be associated with this esteemed journal as a reviewer and as an author for a couple of years. The editorial board consists of many dedicated and reputed experts as its members and they are doing an appreciable work in guiding budding researchers. JCDR is doing a commendable job in scientific research by promoting excellent quality research & review articles and case reports & series. The reviewers provide appropriate suggestions that improve the quality of articles. I strongly recommend my fraternity to encourage JCDR by contributing their valuable research work in this widely accepted, user friendly journal. I hope my collaboration with JCDR will continue for a long time".



Dr. Arundhathi. S
MBBS, MD (Pathology),
Sanjay Gandhi institute of trauma and orthopedics,
Bengaluru.
On Aug 2018




Dr. Mamta Gupta,
"It gives me great pleasure to be associated with JCDR, since last 2-3 years. Since then I have authored, co-authored and reviewed about 25 articles in JCDR. I thank JCDR for giving me an opportunity to improve my own skills as an author and a reviewer.
It 's a multispecialty journal, publishing high quality articles. It gives a platform to the authors to publish their research work which can be available for everyone across the globe to read. The best thing about JCDR is that the full articles of all medical specialties are available as pdf/html for reading free of cost or without institutional subscription, which is not there for other journals. For those who have problem in writing manuscript or do statistical work, JCDR comes for their rescue.
The journal has a monthly publication and the articles are published quite fast. In time compared to other journals. The on-line first publication is also a great advantage and facility to review one's own articles before going to print. The response to any query and permission if required, is quite fast; this is quite commendable. I have a very good experience about seeking quick permission for quoting a photograph (Fig.) from a JCDR article for my chapter authored in an E book. I never thought it would be so easy. No hassles.
Reviewing articles is no less a pain staking process and requires in depth perception, knowledge about the topic for review. It requires time and concentration, yet I enjoy doing it. The JCDR website especially for the reviewers is quite user friendly. My suggestions for improving the journal is, more strict review process, so that only high quality articles are published. I find a a good number of articles in Obst. Gynae, hence, a new journal for this specialty titled JCDR-OG can be started. May be a bimonthly or quarterly publication to begin with. Only selected articles should find a place in it.
An yearly reward for the best article authored can also incentivize the authors. Though the process of finding the best article will be not be very easy. I do not know how reviewing process can be improved. If an article is being reviewed by two reviewers, then opinion of one can be communicated to the other or the final opinion of the editor can be communicated to the reviewer if requested for. This will help one’s reviewing skills.
My best wishes to Dr. Hemant Jain and all the editorial staff of JCDR for their untiring efforts to bring out this journal. I strongly recommend medical fraternity to publish their valuable research work in this esteemed journal, JCDR".



Dr. Mamta Gupta
Consultant
(Ex HOD Obs &Gynae, Hindu Rao Hospital and associated NDMC Medical College, Delhi)
Aug 2018




Dr. Rajendra Kumar Ghritlaharey

"I wish to thank Dr. Hemant Jain, Editor-in-Chief Journal of Clinical and Diagnostic Research (JCDR), for asking me to write up few words.
Writing is the representation of language in a textual medium i e; into the words and sentences on paper. Quality medical manuscript writing in particular, demands not only a high-quality research, but also requires accurate and concise communication of findings and conclusions, with adherence to particular journal guidelines. In medical field whether working in teaching, private, or in corporate institution, everyone wants to excel in his / her own field and get recognised by making manuscripts publication.


Authors are the souls of any journal, and deserve much respect. To publish a journal manuscripts are needed from authors. Authors have a great responsibility for producing facts of their work in terms of number and results truthfully and an individual honesty is expected from authors in this regards. Both ways its true "No authors-No manuscripts-No journals" and "No journals–No manuscripts–No authors". Reviewing a manuscript is also a very responsible and important task of any peer-reviewed journal and to be taken seriously. It needs knowledge on the subject, sincerity, honesty and determination. Although the process of reviewing a manuscript is a time consuming task butit is expected to give one's best remarks within the time frame of the journal.
Salient features of the JCDR: It is a biomedical, multidisciplinary (including all medical and dental specialities), e-journal, with wide scope and extensive author support. At the same time, a free text of manuscript is available in HTML and PDF format. There is fast growing authorship and readership with JCDR as this can be judged by the number of articles published in it i e; in Feb 2007 of its first issue, it contained 5 articles only, and now in its recent volume published in April 2011, it contained 67 manuscripts. This e-journal is fulfilling the commitments and objectives sincerely, (as stated by Editor-in-chief in his preface to first edition) i e; to encourage physicians through the internet, especially from the developing countries who witness a spectrum of disease and acquire a wealth of knowledge to publish their experiences to benefit the medical community in patients care. I also feel that many of us have work of substance, newer ideas, adequate clinical materials but poor in medical writing and hesitation to submit the work and need help. JCDR provides authors help in this regards.
Timely publication of journal: Publication of manuscripts and bringing out the issue in time is one of the positive aspects of JCDR and is possible with strong support team in terms of peer reviewers, proof reading, language check, computer operators, etc. This is one of the great reasons for authors to submit their work with JCDR. Another best part of JCDR is "Online first Publications" facilities available for the authors. This facility not only provides the prompt publications of the manuscripts but at the same time also early availability of the manuscripts for the readers.
Indexation and online availability: Indexation transforms the journal in some sense from its local ownership to the worldwide professional community and to the public.JCDR is indexed with Embase & EMbiology, Google Scholar, Index Copernicus, Chemical Abstracts Service, Journal seek Database, Indian Science Abstracts, to name few of them. Manuscriptspublished in JCDR are available on major search engines ie; google, yahoo, msn.
In the era of fast growing newer technologies, and in computer and internet friendly environment the manuscripts preparation, submission, review, revision, etc and all can be done and checked with a click from all corer of the world, at any time. Of course there is always a scope for improvement in every field and none is perfect. To progress, one needs to identify the areas of one's weakness and to strengthen them.
It is well said that "happy beginning is half done" and it fits perfectly with JCDR. It has grown considerably and I feel it has already grown up from its infancy to adolescence, achieving the status of standard online e-journal form Indian continent since its inception in Feb 2007. This had been made possible due to the efforts and the hard work put in it. The way the JCDR is improving with every new volume, with good quality original manuscripts, makes it a quality journal for readers. I must thank and congratulate Dr Hemant Jain, Editor-in-Chief JCDR and his team for their sincere efforts, dedication, and determination for making JCDR a fast growing journal.
Every one of us: authors, reviewers, editors, and publisher are responsible for enhancing the stature of the journal. I wish for a great success for JCDR."



Thanking you
With sincere regards
Dr. Rajendra Kumar Ghritlaharey, M.S., M. Ch., FAIS
Associate Professor,
Department of Paediatric Surgery, Gandhi Medical College & Associated
Kamla Nehru & Hamidia Hospitals Bhopal, Madhya Pradesh 462 001 (India)
E-mail: drrajendrak1@rediffmail.com
On May 11,2011




Dr. Shankar P.R.

"On looking back through my Gmail archives after being requested by the journal to write a short editorial about my experiences of publishing with the Journal of Clinical and Diagnostic Research (JCDR), I came across an e-mail from Dr. Hemant Jain, Editor, in March 2007, which introduced the new electronic journal. The main features of the journal which were outlined in the e-mail were extensive author support, cash rewards, the peer review process, and other salient features of the journal.
Over a span of over four years, we (I and my colleagues) have published around 25 articles in the journal. In this editorial, I plan to briefly discuss my experiences of publishing with JCDR and the strengths of the journal and to finally address the areas for improvement.
My experiences of publishing with JCDR: Overall, my experiences of publishing withJCDR have been positive. The best point about the journal is that it responds to queries from the author. This may seem to be simple and not too much to ask for, but unfortunately, many journals in the subcontinent and from many developing countries do not respond or they respond with a long delay to the queries from the authors 1. The reasons could be many, including lack of optimal secretarial and other support. Another problem with many journals is the slowness of the review process. Editorial processing and peer review can take anywhere between a year to two years with some journals. Also, some journals do not keep the contributors informed about the progress of the review process. Due to the long review process, the articles can lose their relevance and topicality. A major benefit with JCDR is the timeliness and promptness of its response. In Dr Jain's e-mail which was sent to me in 2007, before the introduction of the Pre-publishing system, he had stated that he had received my submission and that he would get back to me within seven days and he did!
Most of the manuscripts are published within 3 to 4 months of their submission if they are found to be suitable after the review process. JCDR is published bimonthly and the accepted articles were usually published in the next issue. Recently, due to the increased volume of the submissions, the review process has become slower and it ?? Section can take from 4 to 6 months for the articles to be reviewed. The journal has an extensive author support system and it has recently introduced a paid expedited review process. The journal also mentions the average time for processing the manuscript under different submission systems - regular submission and expedited review.
Strengths of the journal: The journal has an online first facility in which the accepted manuscripts may be published on the website before being included in a regular issue of the journal. This cuts down the time between their acceptance and the publication. The journal is indexed in many databases, though not in PubMed. The editorial board should now take steps to index the journal in PubMed. The journal has a system of notifying readers through e-mail when a new issue is released. Also, the articles are available in both the HTML and the PDF formats. I especially like the new and colorful page format of the journal. Also, the access statistics of the articles are available. The prepublication and the manuscript tracking system are also helpful for the authors.
Areas for improvement: In certain cases, I felt that the peer review process of the manuscripts was not up to international standards and that it should be strengthened. Also, the number of manuscripts in an issue is high and it may be difficult for readers to go through all of them. The journal can consider tightening of the peer review process and increasing the quality standards for the acceptance of the manuscripts. I faced occasional problems with the online manuscript submission (Pre-publishing) system, which have to be addressed.
Overall, the publishing process with JCDR has been smooth, quick and relatively hassle free and I can recommend other authors to consider the journal as an outlet for their work."



Dr. P. Ravi Shankar
KIST Medical College, P.O. Box 14142, Kathmandu, Nepal.
E-mail: ravi.dr.shankar@gmail.com
On April 2011
Anuradha

Dear team JCDR, I would like to thank you for the very professional and polite service provided by everyone at JCDR. While i have been in the field of writing and editing for sometime, this has been my first attempt in publishing a scientific paper.Thank you for hand-holding me through the process.


Dr. Anuradha
E-mail: anuradha2nittur@gmail.com
On Jan 2020

Important Notice

Original article / research
Year : 2023 | Month : October | Volume : 17 | Issue : 10 | Page : QC10 - QC13 Full Version

Role of Serum β-hCG and First Trimester Ultrasonographic Parameters in Predicting Mid-trimester Pregnancy Outcomes: A Prospective Cohort Study


Published: October 1, 2023 | DOI: https://doi.org/10.7860/JCDR/2023/63810.18587
Shanmuga Priya Rajamnickam, Sajeethakumari Raveendran, Saswati Tripathy, Anuradha Murugesan, Deboral Panneerselvam

1. Junior Resident, Department of Obstetrics and Gynaecology, SRM Medical College Hospital and Research Centre, SRM Institute of Science and Technology, Chengalpattu, Tamil Nadu, India. 2. Professor, Department of Obstetrics and Gynaecology, SRM Medical College Hospital and Research Centre, SRM Institute of Science and Technology, Chengalpattu, Tamil Nadu, India. 3. Professor, Department of Obstetrics and Gynaecology, SRM Medical College Hospital and Research Centre, SRM Institute of Science and Technology, Chengalpattu, Tamil Nadu, India. 4. Professor and Head, Department of Obstetrics and Gynaecology, SRM Medical College Hospital and Research Centre, SRM Institute of Science and Technology, Chengalpattu, Tamil Nadu, India. 5. Research Scholar, Department of Obstetrics and Gynaecology, SRM Medical College Hospital and Research Centre, SRM Institute of Science and Technology, Chengalpattu, Tamil Nadu, India.

Correspondence Address :
Dr. Sajeethakumari Raveendran,
Professor, Department of Obstetrics and Gynaecology, SRM Medical College Hospital and Research Centre, SRM Institute of Science and Technology, Chengalpattu-603203, Tamil Nadu, India.
E-mail: sajeethaprabhakar@gmail.com

Abstract

Introduction: One of the concerns in pregnant women is the risk of miscarriage and the psychological sequelae that follow. Screening in early pregnancy can identify future miscarriages in asymptomatic pregnancies.

Aim: To study the role of serum Beta-Human Chorionic Gonadotropin (β-hCG) doubling and ultrasonic parameters like Yolk Sac Diameter (YSD), Gestational Sac Diameter (GSD), and Crown-Rump Length (CRL) in predicting mid-trimester pregnancy outcomes.

Materials and Methods: A prospective cohort study was conducted at SRM Medical College and Hospital in Tamil Nadu, India, among 381 antenatal women between 6-10 weeks of gestation for a period of two years from December 2017 to July 2019. At baseline, parameters like serum β-hCG doubling titer at 48 hours and ultrasound parameters like YSD, GSD, and CRL were evaluated. The participants were followed-up until 20 weeks of gestation. The results were statistically analysed using sensitivity, specificity, Positive Predictive Value (PPV), and Negative Predictive Value (NPV).

Results: The mean age of the women included in the study was 25.89±4.2 years, with the majority of women belonging to the 21-29 years age group. Among the enrolled pregnant women, 347 had normal outcomes while 34 experienced pregnancy failure. The results indicated that β-hCG was the strongest predictor of pregnancy outcomes with a sensitivity of 52.9%, specificity of 100%, PPV of 100%, and NPV of 95.6%. YSD predicted loss rates with a sensitivity of 50%, specificity of 97.1%, PPV of 62.9%, and NPV of 95.2%. GSD predicted miscarriage with a sensitivity of 17.6%, specificity of 97.4%, PPV of 40%, and NPV of 92.3%. CRL predicted miscarriage with a sensitivity of 30.5%, specificity of 97.9%, PPV of 61.1%, and NPV of 93.2%.

Conclusion: β-hCG, YSD, GSD, and CRL were found to be statistically significant in predicting abnormal pregnancy outcomes. Among the four, β-hCG proved to be the best predictor.

Keywords

β-human chorionic gonadotropin, Crown-rump length, Gestational sac diameter, Yolk sac diameter

A successful pregnancy is one of the milestones in any woman’s life. Here, one of the concerns is the risk of miscarriage, which is devastating to women, especially in developing countries where lack of awareness and poor diagnostic approaches add to the problem. People must try to widen the scope of predicting and diagnosing it early, thereby terminating a pregnancy that doesn’t stand a chance of success (1),(2). Early warning of probable miscarriage can modify the psychological morbidity associated with it. The literature outlines various biochemical markers for outcome prediction, namely Alpha Fetoprotein (AFP), β-hCG, progesterone, CA-125, Pregnancy-associated Plasma Protein A (PAPPA), Estradiol (E2), activin A, inhibin A, Placental Growth Factor (PIGF), soluble Fms-like tyrosine kinase 1 (sFlt-1), etc., (1). Subjecting women to undergo all these tests can be cumbersome and misleading. In the era of modern medicine, ultrasound, especially Transvaginal Ultrasonography (TVS), has revolutionised the field of obstetrics. However, ultrasound imaging is operator-dependent, and the quality of the diagnosis depends on skill and experience. CRL, YSD, GSD are three important measurements normally studied in early USG for gestational age calculation (3). Hence, the present study was aimed to study the role of serum β-hCG doubling and ultrasonic parameters like YSD, GSD, and CRL in predicting mid-trimester pregnancy outcomes.

Material and Methods

A prospective cohort study was conducted at SRM Medical College and Hospital, Tamil Nadu, India, among 381 antenatal women between 6-10 weeks of gestation for a period of two years from December 2017 to July 2019. Ethical clearance was obtained by the Institutional Ethical Committee (IEC) to conduct the study (No: 1405/IEC/2018), and informed consent was obtained from the participants. Consecutive samples that met the study criteria were included.

Inclusion criteria: A total of 414 pregnant women between 18-35 years of age with a single intrauterine gestation of 6-10 weeks attending the antenatal Outpatient Department (OPD) were included in the study. Out of these, 33 were lost during follow-up, and the remaining 381 were included in the study.

Exclusion criteria: Women with ectopic pregnancy, multiple pregnancies, molar pregnancy, structural anomalies of the uterus and cervix, and those with known endocrine and immunological disorders causing abnormal pregnancy outcomes were excluded from the study.

Study Procedure

A 7.7 MHz transducer was used to perform TVS. Parameters such as YSD, GSD, CRL, and Foetal Heart Rate (FHR) were measured. The CRL was measured as the greatest length in a straight line from the cranial to the caudal end of the body in the straightest possible position of the embryo. GSD was determined by measuring the length, width, and height of the sac and then dividing by 3. The YSD was measured from the inner to the inner diameter of the sac without including the walls of the sac in the measurement (Table/Fig 1). YSD <2 mm and >6 mm, GSD, and CRL values >2SD/<2SD of the mean were considered abnormal (2). Serum β-hCG was done at the first visit between 6-10 weeks and repeated after 48 hours to check for doubling, i.e., atleast 66% of the initial β-hCG. Patients who underwent TVS and had two β-hCG values were asked to review at 12 weeks, 16 weeks, and 20 weeks for follow-up. Patients were informed to report immediately if they experienced symptoms such as abdominal pain or vaginal bleeding. Women with symptoms of threatened abortion were advised bed rest, started on progesterone therapy, and followed-up weekly until their condition improved. NT scan (nuchal translucency scan) and anomaly scan were performed at 12 and 20 weeks, respectively. Any pregnancy diagnosed with an anomalous foetus in these USG scans was terminated. A normal outcome was defined as a pregnancy that continued beyond 20 weeks. An abnormal outcome was defined as a pregnancy that ended in unintentional miscarriage, irrespective of aetiology.

Statistical Analysis

Statistical analysis was performed using Statistical Package for Social Sciences (SPSS) version 19.0. Sensitivity, specificity, PPV, NPV, and Fisher’s-exact probability were used to determine the relationship between β-hCG, YSD, GSD, CRL, and abnormal pregnancy outcomes.

Results

The mean age of the women included in the study was 25.89±4.2 years, with the majority of women belonging to the 21-29 years age group (Table/Fig 2). Out of the total 381 pregnancies in the present study, 34 women (9%) subsequently miscarried. Among the 34 miscarried pregnancies, 25 women (98%) had early pregnancy loss before 12 weeks of gestation, and 9 (2%) had mid-trimester pregnancy losses (between 12 weeks-20 weeks). Among the early pregnancy losses, 20 (59%) had spontaneous abortions, while 14 (38%) were missed abortions. One pregnancy was terminated due to Non Immune Foetal Hydrops (NIFH).

The peak incidence of miscarriage was observed in women over 30 years of age in 8 (12%) women, followed by women under 20 years old 4 (11%). When considering the number of prior pregnancy losses, the miscarriage rates steadily increased from 2 (3.2%) in pregnancies with one prior loss to 3 (100%) in pregnancies with four prior losses. There was only one female with five prior pregnancy losses who successfully completed her pregnancy. In the present study, majority of miscarriages occurred between 7-8+6 weeks 20 (24%). Only 16 (5%) out of 347 pregnancies with a normal rise in β-hCG subsequently miscarried (Table/Fig 3). These results indicate that β-hCG was the strongest predictor of pregnancy outcomes, with a sensitivity of 52.9%, specificity of 100%, PPV of 100%, and NPV of 95.6% (Table/Fig 4).

In the present study, authors observed higher pregnancy loss rates of 30% and 83% in patients with YSD <2 mm and >6 mm, respectively. This rate was relatively low (5%) in cases of patients with normal YSD (between 2-6 mm) (Table/Fig 5). Similar trends were noted for GSD and CRL, although the differences were not significant (Table/Fig 6),(Table/Fig 7).

Analysing these four parameters, all of them predicted miscarriage with statistical significance. Among them, β-hCG proved to be the strongest parameter with the highest sensitivity (52.9%), specificity (100%), and PPV (100%). Among the ultrasonographic parameters, YSD was a better predictor, as it had the highest sensitivity of 50% and PPV of 62.9% (Table/Fig 4).

Discussion

The prevalence of miscarriage in the Indian population is about 10%-15% (1). Out of a total of 381 pregnancies, 34 women (9%) subsequently miscarried. In the present study, the miscarriage rates were 4 (11%) in women under 20 years old, 22 (8%) in the age group between 21 to 29 years, and peaked at 8 (12%) in women over 30 years of age. These findings are consistent with studies by Siddiqi TA et al., who noted a significantly greater incidence of pregnancy loss after 34 years of age compared to women under 34 years old (11.1% versus 4.4%) (2), and by Kajii T et al., (3). However, Makrydimas G et al., reported higher pregnancy loss rates after 35 years - 4% in women under 20 years old and 20% in women over 35 years old (4). The incidence of euploid abortion increased significantly when maternal age exceeded 35 years, as reported by Stein in New York Academic Press (5). However, in the present study, cause of miscarriage was not studied at the chromosomal level.

Present research revealed that in women with prior miscarriages, the pregnancy loss rate increased with the number of previous losses - reaching 100% in women with a history of four prior losses. However, the authors also observed a woman with five previous pregnancy losses in the present study who had a successful outcome. This finding is in accordance with studies by Magnus MC et al., (6), which showed that the risk of miscarriage was increased in women whose previous pregnancy ended in miscarriage {Odds Ratio (OR) 1.65, 95% Confidence Interval (CI) 1.59 to 1.71} compared to women with no previous pregnancy loss.

After an ultrasound detects FHR, the risk of pregnancy loss is significantly lower. In the present study, miscarriage rates peaked at the 8th week of gestation (14%) and subsequently decreased in the following weeks (8% at the 9th and 10th week). Similarly, the results of Makrydimas G et al., showed loss rates of 10% at six weeks of gestation, declining to 3% at 10 weeks of gestation (4). This proposition is also supported by the study of Ammon Avalos L et al., which stated that miscarriage rates decline with advancing gestational age (7). GSD showed a positive association with the prediction of miscarriage, which was statistically significant. Studies by Nyberg DA et al., Makrydimas G et al., and Falco P et al., demonstrated loss rates of 73%, 73.7%, and 93%, respectively, with abnormal GSD (p=0.0001) (8),(9),(10). Therefore, GSD may have a role as a screening tool in predicting miscarriages. In a study by Shahin AHE et al., the mean GSD in those with early pregnancy loss was 2.02±1.26 mm, while mothers who successfully completed the first trimester had a GSD of 4.15±1.84 mm (11). However, due to the higher frequency of first-trimester losses in their study, present study was unable to demonstrate such a significant correlation.

The authors concluded that YSD predicts loss rates with a sensitivity of 50%, specificity of 97.1%, PPV of 62.9%, and NPV of 95.2%. This is similar to studies conducted by Lindsay DJ et al., Stampone C et al., Küçük T et al., Chama C et al., Suguna B and Sukanya K, where the sensitivity of YSD in predicting pregnancy loss rates was 15.6%, 68.7%, 65%, 91.4%, and 62.3%, respectively. The specificity in these studies was 97.4%, 99%, 97%, 66%, and 64.1%, respectively (12),(13),(14),(15),(16). Although authors agree that abnormal YS shape predicts abnormal pregnancy outcomes, the definitions for abnormal YS were not definitely mentioned and hence were not included in the present study (10),(17),(18). In contrast to the above studies, Makrydimas G et al., and Maged AM and AI Mostafa W could not find a significant relation between abnormal YSD and miscarriage rates (p=0.06) (4),(19). Detti L et al., also affirmed that a larger yolk sac could predict spontaneous abortions atleast one week prior in 43% of women. The period of loss was advanced in pregnancies with a smaller YSD compared to a larger one, confirming that an enlarged yolk sac is a better predictor of adverse pregnancy outcome (20).

In a study conducted by Barnhart KT et al., atleast 53% increase in β-hCG doubling in two days was observed, which is consistent with the present study where the authors observed 16 (47.05%) cases of β-hCG doubling out of 34 pregnant women (21). This finding is also supported by Porat S et al., who found that 76.47% of miscarriage subjects had β-hCG <150 mIU/mL. Single measurements of β-hCG rather than serial measurements affected their results (22). Thus, β-hCG can be considered the strongest predictor of miscarriage with 100% specificity and 100% PPV.

Limitation(s)

It was a single-centre study, and demographic features like socioeconomic status of the participants were not included. The duration of gestational age studied was in a wide range, i.e., 6-10 weeks of gestation, rather than a specific GA. In terms of YS biometry, the authors only analysed the size and did not consider its shape.

Conclusion

The β-hCG doubling, YSD >6 mm, GSD <2SD or >2SD, and CRL <2SD were found to be statistically significant in predicting abnormal pregnancy outcomes. Among these parameters, β-hCG doubling was found to be a better predictor and should be routinely employed in clinical practices for risk prediction. Additionally, YSD proved to be superior in predicting miscarriage among the sonographic parameters. Reliable prediction of miscarriage in the first trimester could potentially improve pregnancy outcomes by allowing closer prenatal monitoring, earlier diagnosis, and expeditious interventions. Therefore, these parameters can be used in counselling patients regarding the prognosis of their pregnancy. Progesterone support can be considered in cases of absent doubling and abnormal sonographic parameters.

Acknowledgement

The authors would like to thank Dr. RB Balaji for providing statistical analysis support and are grateful to the patients and their families who participated in the present study.

References

1.
Patki A, Chauhan N. An epidemiology study to determine the prevalence and risk factors associated with recurrent spontaneous miscarriage in India. The Journal of Obstetrics and Gynecology of India. 2016;66(5):310-15. [crossref][PubMed]
2.
Siddiqi TA, Caligaris JT, Miodovnik M, Holroyde JC, Mimouni F. Rate of spontaneous abortion after first trimester sonographic demonstration of fetal cardiac activity. Am J Perinatol. 1988;5(1):01-04. [crossref][PubMed]
3.
Kajii T, Ferrier A, Niikawa N, Takahara H, Ohama K, Avirachan S. Anatomic and chromosomal anomalies in 639 spontaneous abortuses. Hum Genet. 1980;55(1):87-98. [crossref][PubMed]
4.
Makrydimas G, Sebire NJ, Lolis D, Vlassis N, Nicolaides KH. Fetal loss following ultrasound diagnosis of a live fetus at 6-10 weeks of gestation. Ultrasound Obstet Gynecol. 2003;22(4):368-72. [crossref][PubMed]
5.
Stein Z, Susser E, Kline J. Maternal age and spontaneous abortion. Human Embryonic and Fetal Death. 1980;103.
6.
Magnus MC, Wilcox AJ, Morken NH, Weinberg CR, Håberg SE. Role of maternal age and pregnancy history in risk of miscarriage: Prospective register based study. BMJ. 2019;364:l869. [crossref][PubMed]
7.
Ammon Avalos L, Galindo C, Li DK. A systematic review to calculate background miscarriage rates using life table analysis. Birth Defects Res A Clin Mol Teratol. 2012;94(6):417-23. [crossref][PubMed]
8.
Nyberg DA, Mack LA, Laing FC, Patten RM. Distinguishing normal from abnormal gestational sac growth in early pregnancy. J Ultrasound Med. 1987;6(1):23-27. [crossref][PubMed]
9.
Falco P, Milano V, Pilu G, David C, Grisolia G, Rizzo N, et al. Sonography of pregnancies with first-trimester bleeding and a viable embryo: A study of prognostic indicators by logistic regression analysis. Ultrasound in Obstetrics and Gynecology. 1996;7(3):165-69.[crossref][PubMed]
10.
Tan S. Abnormal sonographic appearances of the yolk sac: Which can be associated with adverse perinatal outcome? Med Ultrason. 2014;16(1):15-20. [crossref][PubMed]
11.
Shahin AHE, Elmasry MES, Gad M. Yolk sac size and shape, gestational sac diameter, and embryonic heart rate as prognostic factors of first-trimester pregnancy outcomes. Menoufia Medical Journal. 2022;35(2):776. [crossref]
12.
Lindsay DJ, Lovett IS, Lyons EA, Levi CS, Zheng XH, Holt SC, et al. Yolk sac diameter and shape at endovaginal US: Predictors of pregnancy outcome in the first trimester. Radiology. 1992;183(1):115-18. [crossref][PubMed]
13.
Stampone C, Nicotra M, Muttinelli C, Cosmi EV. Transvaginal sonography of the yolk sac in normal and abnormal pregnancy. Journal of Clinical Ultrasound. 1996;24(1):03-09. 3.0.CO;2-N>[crossref]
14.
Küçük T, Duru NK, Yenen MC, Dede M, Ergün A, Bas¸ er l ?. Yolk sac size and shape as predictors of poor pregnancy outcome. J Perinat Med. 1999;27(4):316-20. [crossref][PubMed]
15.
Chama C, Marupa J, Obed J. The value of the secondary yolk sac in predicting pregnancy outcome. J Obstet Gynaecol (Lahore). 2005;25(3):245-47. [crossref][PubMed]
16.
Suguna B, Sukanya K. Yolk sac size & shape as predictors of first trimester pregnancy outcome: A prospective observational study. J Gynecol Obstet Hum Reprod. 2019;48(3):159-64. [crossref][PubMed]
17.
Cho FN, Chen SN, Tai MH, Yang TL. The quality and size of yolk sac in early pregnancy loss. Aust N Z J Obstet Gynaecol. 2006;46(5):413-18. [crossref][PubMed]
18.
Richardson A, Gallos I, Dobson S, Campbell BK, Coomarasamy A, Raine- Fenning N. Accuracy of first-trimester ultrasound in diagnosis of intrauterine pregnancy prior to visualization of the yolk sac: A systematic review and meta-analysis. Ultrasound Obstet Gynecol. 2015;46(2):142-49. [crossref][PubMed]
19.
Maged AM, AI Mostafa W. Biochemical and ultrasonographic predictors of outcome in threatened abortion. Middle East Fertil Soc J. 2013;18(3):177-81. [crossref]
20.
Detti L, Francillon L, Christiansen ME, Peregrin-Alvarez I, Goedecke PJ, Bursac Z, et al. Early pregnancy ultrasound measurements and prediction of first trimester pregnancy loss: A logistic model. Sci Rep. 2020;10(1):1545. [crossref][PubMed]
21.
Barnhart KT, Sammel MD, Rinaudo PF, Zhou L, Hummel AC, Guo W. Symptomatic patients with an early viable intrauterine pregnancy: HCG curves redefined. Obstetrics and Gynecology. 2004;104(1):50-55. [crossref][PubMed]
22.
Porat S, Savchev S, Bdolah Y, Hurwitz A, Haimov-Kochman R. Early serum β-human chorionic gonadotropin in pregnancies after in vitro fertilization: Contribution of treatment variables and prediction of long-term pregnancy outcome. Fertil Steril. 2007;88(1):82-89.[crossref][PubMed]

DOI and Others

DOI: 10.7860/JCDR/2023/63810.18587

Date of Submission: Mar 01, 2023
Date of Peer Review: Jun 07, 2023
Date of Acceptance: Aug 18, 2023
Date of Publishing: Oct 01, 2023

AUTHOR DECLARATION:
• Financial or Other Competing Interests: None
• Was Ethics Committee Approval obtained for this study? Yes
• Was informed consent obtained from the subjects involved in the study? Yes
• For any images presented appropriate consent has been obtained from the subjects. NA

PLAGIARISM CHECKING METHODS:
• Plagiarism X-checker: Mar 10, 2023
• Manual Googling: Jul 11, 2023
• iThenticate Software: Aug 16, 2023 (5%)

ETYMOLOGY: Author Origin

EMENDATIONS: 7

JCDR is now Monthly and more widely Indexed .
  • Emerging Sources Citation Index (Web of Science, thomsonreuters)
  • Index Copernicus ICV 2017: 134.54
  • Academic Search Complete Database
  • Directory of Open Access Journals (DOAJ)
  • Embase
  • EBSCOhost
  • Google Scholar
  • HINARI Access to Research in Health Programme
  • Indian Science Abstracts (ISA)
  • Journal seek Database
  • Google
  • Popline (reproductive health literature)
  • www.omnimedicalsearch.com