Fetal ductus arteriosus constriction and closure: analysis of the causes and perinatal outcome related to 45 consecutive cases

Carregando...
Imagem de Miniatura
Citações na Scopus
51
Tipo de produção
article
Data de publicação
2016
Título da Revista
ISSN da Revista
Título do Volume
Editora
TAYLOR & FRANCIS LTD
Citação
JOURNAL OF MATERNAL-FETAL & NEONATAL MEDICINE, v.29, n.4, p.638-645, 2016
Projetos de Pesquisa
Unidades Organizacionais
Fascículo
Resumo
Objective: The aim of this study was to analyze the causes and perinatal outcome related to fetal ductus arteriosus constriction or closure at a single center over a 26-year period.Methods: This was a retrospective analysis of 45 consecutive cases of constriction (n=41) and closure (n=4) from 1987 through 2013. Patients were divided into Group A (maternal use of non-steroidal anti-inflammatory drugs (NSAID), n=29), Group B (idiopathic, n=8), and Group C (other drugs not previously described, n=8).Results: The median gestational age at diagnosis was 34 weeks (range, 27-38), mean systolic and diastolic velocity in the ductus arteriosus was 2.010.66m/s and 0.71 +/- 0.46m/s, respectively. Among the 29 cases of NSAIDs, 27.5% (8/29) have taken a single day use and 75% multiple days/doses. Right ventricular dilatation was present in 82.2% of the fetuses, tricuspid insufficiency in 86.6%, and heart failure in 22.2%. Neonatal persistent pulmonary hypertension occurred in 17.7% of the patients. Late follow-up showed all 43 survivors alive and healthy with only two deaths from unrelated causes.Conclusions: The results of this study indicate that clinically significant ductal constriction may follow maternal exposure to single doses of NSAIDs. Unknown causes or other new substances were also described, such as naphazoline, fluoxetine, isoxsuprine, caffeine and pesticides. Echocardiographic diagnosis of ductal constriction led to an active medical approach that resulted in low morbidity of this group of patients.
Palavras-chave
Ductus arteriosus constriction, fetal echocardiography, prenatal diagnosis
Referências
  1. Adverse Drug Reactions Advisory Committee, 1998, MED J AUSTRALIA, V169, P2701
  2. Oberlander TF, 2006, ARCH GEN PSYCHIAT, V63, P898, DOI 10.1001/archpsyc.63.8.898
  3. Gournay V, 2011, ARCH CARDIOVASC DIS, V104, P578, DOI 10.1016/j.acvd.2010.06.006
  4. Zielinsky P, 2010, J PERINATOL, V30, P17, DOI 10.1038/jp.2009.101
  5. CHAO RC, 1993, PRENATAL DIAG, V13, P989, DOI 10.1002/pd.1970131014
  6. Hofstadler G, 1996, AM J OBSTET GYNECOL, V174, P879, DOI 10.1016/S0002-9378(96)70317-4
  7. Auer M, 2004, ULTRASOUND OBST GYN, V23, P513, DOI 10.1002/uog.1038
  8. MOMMA K, 1984, PROSTAGLANDINS, V28, P527, DOI 10.1016/0090-6980(84)90241-7
  9. TULZER G, 1991, J AM COLL CARDIOL, V18, P532
  10. Trevett TN, 2004, ULTRASOUND OBST GYN, V23, P517, DOI 10.1002/uog.980
  11. Savage AH, 2007, AM J PERINAT, V24, P207, DOI 10.1055/s-2007-976546
  12. Zenker M, 1998, J PERINAT MED, V26, P231
  13. Enzensberger C, 2012, J ULTRAS MED, V31, P1285
  14. Vermillion ST, 1997, AM J OBSTET GYNECOL, V177, P256, DOI 10.1016/S0002-9378(97)70184-4
  15. Nygaard SI, 2009, PEDIATR CARDIOL, V30, P176, DOI 10.1007/s00246-008-9269-1
  16. Sridharan S, 2009, ULTRASOUND OBST GYN, V34, P358, DOI 10.1002/uog.6453
  17. Ostensen M, 2004, LUPUS, V13, P746, DOI 10.1191/0961203303lu2004oa
  18. Grab D, 2000, ULTRASOUND OBST GYN, V15, P19, DOI 10.1046/j.1469-0705.2000.00009.x
  19. Kondo T, 2006, PATHOL INT, V56, P554, DOI 10.1111/j.1440-1827.2006.02005
  20. Chambers CD, 2006, NEW ENGL J MED, V354, P579, DOI 10.1056/NEJMoa052744
  21. HUHTA JC, 1987, CIRCULATION, V75, P406
  22. Paladini D, 2005, ULTRASOUND OBST GYN, V25, P357, DOI 10.1002/uog.1873
  23. Briggs GG, 1998, DRUGS PREGNANCY LACT
  24. Luchese Stelamaris, 2003, Arq Bras Cardiol, V81, P405, DOI 10.1590/S0066-782X2003001200007
  25. OEI SG, 1989, BRIT MED J, V298, P568
  26. Soslow JH, 2008, ECHOCARDIOGRAPH, V25, P514