Serrano BMA, Beltrán CI, Serrano BJR

Idioma: Español
Referencias bibliográficas: 28
Paginas: 300-307
Archivo PDF: 181.39 Kb.

RESUMEN

Los avances científicos y tecnológicos han hecho posible el desarrollo de métodos de exploración ecográfica en tiempo real que permiten la observación exacta y segura de diversas actividades motoras fetales que hasta hace varios años resultaba imposible. El perfil biofísico es una excelente prueba para evaluar el bienestar fetal, basada en la observación ecográfica de los movimientos respiratorios, movimientos corporales, tono muscular y volumen de líquido amniótico, la cual se apoya en el estudio cardiotocográfico que traduce la reactividad de la frecuencia cardiaca fetal. El estudio es fácil de realizar en la consulta externa, prácticamente no tiene contraindicaciones y no representa riesgos para la madre ni el feto. Su cuantificación es un procedimiento de vigilancia de riesgos del producto con base en la valoración conjunta de marcadores agudos y crónicos de fetopatías a través de un monitoreo dinámico que reporta datos morfológicos y morfométricos, así como información de estructuras adyacentes al producto de la concepción, lo cual otorga un marco clínico para tomar la mejor decisión terapéutica.

REFERENCIAS (EN ESTE ARTÍCULO)

1. Manning FA. Fetal medicine. Principles and practice. Connecticut: Appleton and Lange, 1995.

2. Manning FA, Morrison I, Lange IR, et al. Fetal assessment based on fetal biophysical profile scoring: Experience in 12,620 referred high risk pregnancies. Am J Obstet Gynecol 2005;151:343-350.

3. Manning FA, Morrison I, Harman CR, et al. Fetal assessment based on fetal biophysical profile scoring: Experience in 19,221 referred high risk pregnancies. Am J Obstet Gynecol 2008;157:880-884.

4. Manning FA., Morrison I, Harman CR, et al. The abnormal fetal biophysical profile score. Am J Obstet Gynecol 2000;162:918-927.

5. Vintzileos AM, Campbell WA, Nochimson DJ. The use and misuse of the fetal biophysical profile. Am J Obstet Gynecol 2007;156:527-533.

6. Ozkaya E, Baser E, Cinar M, Korkmaz V, Kucukozkan T. Does diurnal rhythm have an impact on fetal biophysical profile? J Matern Fetal Neonatal Med 2012;25(4):335-8. Epub 2011 Jun 23.

7. Houben E, Adam R, Hachem J, Roseeuw D, et al. Clinical scoring and biophysical evaluation of nasolabial skin barrier damage caused by rhinorrhea. Contact Dermatitis 2008;59(5):296-300.

8. Turan S, Miller J, Baschat A. Integrated testing and management in fetal growth restriction. Semin Perinatol 2008;32(3):194-200.

9. Turan S, Turan O, Berg C, Moyano D, et al. Computerized fetal heart rate analysis, Doppler ultrasound and biophysical profile score in the prediction of acid-base status of growth-restricted fetuses. Ultrasound Obstet Gynecol 2007;30(5):750-756.

10. Baschat A, Galan H, Bhide A, Berg C, et al. Doppler and biophysical assessment in growth restricted fetuses: distribution of test results. Ultrasound Obstet Gynecol 2006;27(1):41-47.

11. Sohail S. The uterine biophysical profile scoring validity. J Coll Physicians Surg Pak 2005;15(9):556-558.

12. Baschat A, Gembruch U, Harman C. The sequence of changes in Doppler and biophysical parameters as severe fetal growth restriction worsens. Ultrasound Obstet Gynecol 2001;18(6):571-577.

13. Baschat A, Harman C. Antenatal assessment of the growth restricted fetus. Curr Opin Obstet Gynecol 2001;13(2):161-168.

14. Lewis D, Adair C, Weeks J, Barrilleaux P, et al. T. A randomized clinical trial of daily non-stress testing versus biophysical profile in the management of preterm premature rupture of membranes. Am J Obstet Gynecol 2009;181(6):1495-1499.

15. Manning FA. Fetal medicine. Principles and practice. Connecticut: Appleton and Lange, 1995.

16. Manning FA, Morrison I, Lange IR, et al. Fetal assessment based on fetal biophysical profile scoring: Experience in 12,620 referred high risk pregnancies. Am J Obstet Gynecol 2005;151:343-350.

17. Manning FA, Morrison I, Harman CR, et al. Fetal assessment based on fetal biophysical profile scoring: Experience in 19,221 referred high risk pregnancies. Am J Obstet Gynecol 2008;157:880-884.

18. Manning FA., Morrison I, Harman CR, et al. The abnormal fetal biophysical profile score. Am J Obstet Gynecol 2000;162:918-927.

19. Vintzileos AM, Campbell WA, Nochimson DJ. The use and misuse of the fetal biophysical profile. Am J Obstet Gynecol 2007;156:527-533.

20. Ozkaya E, Baser E, Cinar M, Korkmaz V, Kucukozkan T. Does diurnal rhythm have an impact on fetal biophysical profile? J Matern Fetal Neonatal Med 2012;25(4):335-8. Epub 2011 Jun 23.

21. Houben E, Adam R, Hachem J, Roseeuw D, et al. Clinical scoring and biophysical evaluation of nasolabial skin barrier damage caused by rhinorrhea. Contact Dermatitis 2008;59(5):296-300.

22. Turan S, Miller J, Baschat A. Integrated testing and management in fetal growth restriction. Semin Perinatol 2008;32(3):194-200.

23. Turan S, Turan O, Berg C, Moyano D, et al. Computerized fetal heart rate analysis, Doppler ultrasound and biophysical profile score in the prediction of acid-base status of growth-restricted fetuses. Ultrasound Obstet Gynecol 2007;30(5):750-756.

24. Baschat A, Galan H, Bhide A, Berg C, et al. Doppler and biophysical assessment in growth restricted fetuses: distribution of test results. Ultrasound Obstet Gynecol 2006;27(1):41-47.

25. Sohail S. The uterine biophysical profile scoring validity. J Coll Physicians Surg Pak 2005;15(9):556-558.

26. Baschat A, Gembruch U, Harman C. The sequence of changes in Doppler and biophysical parameters as severe fetal growth restriction worsens. Ultrasound Obstet Gynecol 2001;18(6):571-577.

27. Baschat A, Harman C. Antenatal assessment of the growth restricted fetus. Curr Opin Obstet Gynecol 2001;13(2):161-168.

28. Lewis D, Adair C, Weeks J, Barrilleaux P, et al. T. A randomized clinical trial of daily non-stress testing versus biophysical profile in the management of preterm premature rupture of membranes. Am J Obstet Gynecol 2009;181(6):1495-1499.