Clinical significance of echogenic amniotic fluid
Purpose This study aimed to determine the clinical significance of echogenic amniotic fluid. Methods We prospectively studied 19 twin pregnancies in which the amniotic fluid in 1 sac was anechoic and that in the other sac was echogenic. Morphologic characteristics of amniotic fluid were assessed fro...
Gespeichert in:
| Veröffentlicht in: | Journal of clinical ultrasound 1998-05, Vol.26 (4), p.191-193 |
|---|---|
| Hauptverfasser: | , , |
| Format: | Artikel |
| Sprache: | eng |
| Schlagworte: | |
| Online-Zugang: | Volltext |
| Tags: |
Tag hinzufügen
Keine Tags, Fügen Sie den ersten Tag hinzu!
|
| container_end_page | 193 |
|---|---|
| container_issue | 4 |
| container_start_page | 191 |
| container_title | Journal of clinical ultrasound |
| container_volume | 26 |
| creator | Petrikovsky, Boris Schneider, Elizabeth P. Gross, Beth |
| description | Purpose
This study aimed to determine the clinical significance of echogenic amniotic fluid.
Methods
We prospectively studied 19 twin pregnancies in which the amniotic fluid in 1 sac was anechoic and that in the other sac was echogenic. Morphologic characteristics of amniotic fluid were assessed from samples taken at amniocentesis or upon delivery within 48 hours after sonographic examination.
Results
In twins with echogenic amniotic fluid, assessment revealed clear fluid in 6 cases (32%), vernix caseosa in 12 (63%), and meconium in 1 (5%). In co‐twins with anechoic amniotic fluid, assessment revealed clear fluid in 9 cases (47%), vernix caseosa in 6 (32%), and meconium in 4 (21%).
Conclusions
Echogenic amniotic fluid on prenatal sonography is not predictive of meconium.© 1998 John Wiley & Sons, Inc. J Clin Ultrasound 26:191–193, 1998. |
| doi_str_mv | 10.1002/(SICI)1097-0096(199805)26:4<191::AID-JCU2>3.0.CO;2-8 |
| format | Article |
| fullrecord | <record><control><sourceid>proquest_cross</sourceid><recordid>TN_cdi_proquest_miscellaneous_79833582</recordid><sourceformat>XML</sourceformat><sourcesystem>PC</sourcesystem><sourcerecordid>79833582</sourcerecordid><originalsourceid>FETCH-LOGICAL-c4272-dd8ccbbbb9f470f4ae61f1207300b4046d80fa9e8179ae02e36d798925dfc64e3</originalsourceid><addsrcrecordid>eNqFkM1uEzEUhS0EKmnhEZCyQKhdTLj-G9uhQmoHGoIKWZCK5ZXjsYthMlPGiaBvj4dEYQES3txrnePjo4-QcwoTCsBenn6aV_MzCkYVAKY8pcZokGesnIpzauh0ejF_U7yvbthrPoFJtXjFCv2AjA4PHpJRHrRgStLH5DilrwBQSimPyJGRinFNR4RWTWyjs804xds2hry2zo-7MPbuS3frsza26zZ2m7yEZhvrJ-RRsE3yT_fzhNxcvV1W74rrxWxeXVwXTjDFirrWzq3yMUEoCML6kgbKQHGAlQBR1hqCNV5TZawH5nlZK6MNk3VwpfD8hLzY5d713fetTxtcx-R809jWd9uE2cy51Cwblzuj67uUeh_wro9r298jBRxIIg4kcQCDAxjckURWosg7RcwkcSCJHAGrBTLUOfbZ_v_tau3rQ-geXdaf73WbMr_QZ3AxHWyMUaGZ-NPuR2z8_V_V_tPsH8V-33NssYuNaeN_HmJt_w1LxZXEzx9nOIOrD3p5KbDivwBHtqgc</addsrcrecordid><sourcetype>Aggregation Database</sourcetype><iscdi>true</iscdi><recordtype>article</recordtype><pqid>79833582</pqid></control><display><type>article</type><title>Clinical significance of echogenic amniotic fluid</title><source>MEDLINE</source><source>Wiley Online Library Journals Frontfile Complete</source><creator>Petrikovsky, Boris ; Schneider, Elizabeth P. ; Gross, Beth</creator><creatorcontrib>Petrikovsky, Boris ; Schneider, Elizabeth P. ; Gross, Beth</creatorcontrib><description>Purpose
This study aimed to determine the clinical significance of echogenic amniotic fluid.
Methods
We prospectively studied 19 twin pregnancies in which the amniotic fluid in 1 sac was anechoic and that in the other sac was echogenic. Morphologic characteristics of amniotic fluid were assessed from samples taken at amniocentesis or upon delivery within 48 hours after sonographic examination.
Results
In twins with echogenic amniotic fluid, assessment revealed clear fluid in 6 cases (32%), vernix caseosa in 12 (63%), and meconium in 1 (5%). In co‐twins with anechoic amniotic fluid, assessment revealed clear fluid in 9 cases (47%), vernix caseosa in 6 (32%), and meconium in 4 (21%).
Conclusions
Echogenic amniotic fluid on prenatal sonography is not predictive of meconium.© 1998 John Wiley & Sons, Inc. J Clin Ultrasound 26:191–193, 1998.</description><identifier>ISSN: 0091-2751</identifier><identifier>EISSN: 1097-0096</identifier><identifier>DOI: 10.1002/(SICI)1097-0096(199805)26:4<191::AID-JCU2>3.0.CO;2-8</identifier><identifier>PMID: 9572381</identifier><identifier>CODEN: JCULDD</identifier><language>eng</language><publisher>New York: Wiley Subscription Services, Inc., A Wiley Company</publisher><subject>Adult ; Amniotic Fluid - chemistry ; Amniotic Fluid - diagnostic imaging ; amniotic fluid assessment ; Biological and medical sciences ; Female ; Gynecology. Andrology. Obstetrics ; Humans ; Infant, Newborn ; Management. Prenatal diagnosis ; Meconium - diagnostic imaging ; Medical sciences ; Pregnancy ; Pregnancy. Fetus. Placenta ; prenatal ultrasonography ; Prospective Studies ; Twins ; Ultrasonography, Prenatal</subject><ispartof>Journal of clinical ultrasound, 1998-05, Vol.26 (4), p.191-193</ispartof><rights>Copyright © 1998 John Wiley & Sons, Inc.</rights><rights>1998 INIST-CNRS</rights><lds50>peer_reviewed</lds50><woscitedreferencessubscribed>false</woscitedreferencessubscribed><cites>FETCH-LOGICAL-c4272-dd8ccbbbb9f470f4ae61f1207300b4046d80fa9e8179ae02e36d798925dfc64e3</cites></display><links><openurl>$$Topenurl_article</openurl><openurlfulltext>$$Topenurlfull_article</openurlfulltext><thumbnail>$$Tsyndetics_thumb_exl</thumbnail><linktopdf>$$Uhttps://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/pdf/10.1002%2F%28SICI%291097-0096%28199805%2926%3A4%3C191%3A%3AAID-JCU2%3E3.0.CO%3B2-8$$EPDF$$P50$$Gwiley$$H</linktopdf><linktohtml>$$Uhttps://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/full/10.1002%2F%28SICI%291097-0096%28199805%2926%3A4%3C191%3A%3AAID-JCU2%3E3.0.CO%3B2-8$$EHTML$$P50$$Gwiley$$H</linktohtml><link.rule.ids>314,777,781,1412,27905,27906,45555,45556</link.rule.ids><backlink>$$Uhttp://pascal-francis.inist.fr/vibad/index.php?action=getRecordDetail&idt=2214824$$DView record in Pascal Francis$$Hfree_for_read</backlink><backlink>$$Uhttps://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/9572381$$D View this record in MEDLINE/PubMed$$Hfree_for_read</backlink></links><search><creatorcontrib>Petrikovsky, Boris</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Schneider, Elizabeth P.</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Gross, Beth</creatorcontrib><title>Clinical significance of echogenic amniotic fluid</title><title>Journal of clinical ultrasound</title><addtitle>J. Clin. Ultrasound</addtitle><description>Purpose
This study aimed to determine the clinical significance of echogenic amniotic fluid.
Methods
We prospectively studied 19 twin pregnancies in which the amniotic fluid in 1 sac was anechoic and that in the other sac was echogenic. Morphologic characteristics of amniotic fluid were assessed from samples taken at amniocentesis or upon delivery within 48 hours after sonographic examination.
Results
In twins with echogenic amniotic fluid, assessment revealed clear fluid in 6 cases (32%), vernix caseosa in 12 (63%), and meconium in 1 (5%). In co‐twins with anechoic amniotic fluid, assessment revealed clear fluid in 9 cases (47%), vernix caseosa in 6 (32%), and meconium in 4 (21%).
Conclusions
Echogenic amniotic fluid on prenatal sonography is not predictive of meconium.© 1998 John Wiley & Sons, Inc. J Clin Ultrasound 26:191–193, 1998.</description><subject>Adult</subject><subject>Amniotic Fluid - chemistry</subject><subject>Amniotic Fluid - diagnostic imaging</subject><subject>amniotic fluid assessment</subject><subject>Biological and medical sciences</subject><subject>Female</subject><subject>Gynecology. Andrology. Obstetrics</subject><subject>Humans</subject><subject>Infant, Newborn</subject><subject>Management. Prenatal diagnosis</subject><subject>Meconium - diagnostic imaging</subject><subject>Medical sciences</subject><subject>Pregnancy</subject><subject>Pregnancy. Fetus. Placenta</subject><subject>prenatal ultrasonography</subject><subject>Prospective Studies</subject><subject>Twins</subject><subject>Ultrasonography, Prenatal</subject><issn>0091-2751</issn><issn>1097-0096</issn><fulltext>true</fulltext><rsrctype>article</rsrctype><creationdate>1998</creationdate><recordtype>article</recordtype><sourceid>EIF</sourceid><recordid>eNqFkM1uEzEUhS0EKmnhEZCyQKhdTLj-G9uhQmoHGoIKWZCK5ZXjsYthMlPGiaBvj4dEYQES3txrnePjo4-QcwoTCsBenn6aV_MzCkYVAKY8pcZokGesnIpzauh0ejF_U7yvbthrPoFJtXjFCv2AjA4PHpJRHrRgStLH5DilrwBQSimPyJGRinFNR4RWTWyjs804xds2hry2zo-7MPbuS3frsza26zZ2m7yEZhvrJ-RRsE3yT_fzhNxcvV1W74rrxWxeXVwXTjDFirrWzq3yMUEoCML6kgbKQHGAlQBR1hqCNV5TZawH5nlZK6MNk3VwpfD8hLzY5d713fetTxtcx-R809jWd9uE2cy51Cwblzuj67uUeh_wro9r298jBRxIIg4kcQCDAxjckURWosg7RcwkcSCJHAGrBTLUOfbZ_v_tau3rQ-geXdaf73WbMr_QZ3AxHWyMUaGZ-NPuR2z8_V_V_tPsH8V-33NssYuNaeN_HmJt_w1LxZXEzx9nOIOrD3p5KbDivwBHtqgc</recordid><startdate>199805</startdate><enddate>199805</enddate><creator>Petrikovsky, Boris</creator><creator>Schneider, Elizabeth P.</creator><creator>Gross, Beth</creator><general>Wiley Subscription Services, Inc., A Wiley Company</general><general>Wiley</general><scope>BSCLL</scope><scope>IQODW</scope><scope>CGR</scope><scope>CUY</scope><scope>CVF</scope><scope>ECM</scope><scope>EIF</scope><scope>NPM</scope><scope>AAYXX</scope><scope>CITATION</scope><scope>7X8</scope></search><sort><creationdate>199805</creationdate><title>Clinical significance of echogenic amniotic fluid</title><author>Petrikovsky, Boris ; Schneider, Elizabeth P. ; Gross, Beth</author></sort><facets><frbrtype>5</frbrtype><frbrgroupid>cdi_FETCH-LOGICAL-c4272-dd8ccbbbb9f470f4ae61f1207300b4046d80fa9e8179ae02e36d798925dfc64e3</frbrgroupid><rsrctype>articles</rsrctype><prefilter>articles</prefilter><language>eng</language><creationdate>1998</creationdate><topic>Adult</topic><topic>Amniotic Fluid - chemistry</topic><topic>Amniotic Fluid - diagnostic imaging</topic><topic>amniotic fluid assessment</topic><topic>Biological and medical sciences</topic><topic>Female</topic><topic>Gynecology. Andrology. Obstetrics</topic><topic>Humans</topic><topic>Infant, Newborn</topic><topic>Management. Prenatal diagnosis</topic><topic>Meconium - diagnostic imaging</topic><topic>Medical sciences</topic><topic>Pregnancy</topic><topic>Pregnancy. Fetus. Placenta</topic><topic>prenatal ultrasonography</topic><topic>Prospective Studies</topic><topic>Twins</topic><topic>Ultrasonography, Prenatal</topic><toplevel>peer_reviewed</toplevel><toplevel>online_resources</toplevel><creatorcontrib>Petrikovsky, Boris</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Schneider, Elizabeth P.</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Gross, Beth</creatorcontrib><collection>Istex</collection><collection>Pascal-Francis</collection><collection>Medline</collection><collection>MEDLINE</collection><collection>MEDLINE (Ovid)</collection><collection>MEDLINE</collection><collection>MEDLINE</collection><collection>PubMed</collection><collection>CrossRef</collection><collection>MEDLINE - Academic</collection><jtitle>Journal of clinical ultrasound</jtitle></facets><delivery><delcategory>Remote Search Resource</delcategory><fulltext>fulltext</fulltext></delivery><addata><au>Petrikovsky, Boris</au><au>Schneider, Elizabeth P.</au><au>Gross, Beth</au><format>journal</format><genre>article</genre><ristype>JOUR</ristype><atitle>Clinical significance of echogenic amniotic fluid</atitle><jtitle>Journal of clinical ultrasound</jtitle><addtitle>J. Clin. Ultrasound</addtitle><date>1998-05</date><risdate>1998</risdate><volume>26</volume><issue>4</issue><spage>191</spage><epage>193</epage><pages>191-193</pages><issn>0091-2751</issn><eissn>1097-0096</eissn><coden>JCULDD</coden><abstract>Purpose
This study aimed to determine the clinical significance of echogenic amniotic fluid.
Methods
We prospectively studied 19 twin pregnancies in which the amniotic fluid in 1 sac was anechoic and that in the other sac was echogenic. Morphologic characteristics of amniotic fluid were assessed from samples taken at amniocentesis or upon delivery within 48 hours after sonographic examination.
Results
In twins with echogenic amniotic fluid, assessment revealed clear fluid in 6 cases (32%), vernix caseosa in 12 (63%), and meconium in 1 (5%). In co‐twins with anechoic amniotic fluid, assessment revealed clear fluid in 9 cases (47%), vernix caseosa in 6 (32%), and meconium in 4 (21%).
Conclusions
Echogenic amniotic fluid on prenatal sonography is not predictive of meconium.© 1998 John Wiley & Sons, Inc. J Clin Ultrasound 26:191–193, 1998.</abstract><cop>New York</cop><pub>Wiley Subscription Services, Inc., A Wiley Company</pub><pmid>9572381</pmid><doi>10.1002/(SICI)1097-0096(199805)26:4<191::AID-JCU2>3.0.CO;2-8</doi><tpages>3</tpages></addata></record> |
| fulltext | fulltext |
| identifier | ISSN: 0091-2751 |
| ispartof | Journal of clinical ultrasound, 1998-05, Vol.26 (4), p.191-193 |
| issn | 0091-2751 1097-0096 |
| language | eng |
| recordid | cdi_proquest_miscellaneous_79833582 |
| source | MEDLINE; Wiley Online Library Journals Frontfile Complete |
| subjects | Adult Amniotic Fluid - chemistry Amniotic Fluid - diagnostic imaging amniotic fluid assessment Biological and medical sciences Female Gynecology. Andrology. Obstetrics Humans Infant, Newborn Management. Prenatal diagnosis Meconium - diagnostic imaging Medical sciences Pregnancy Pregnancy. Fetus. Placenta prenatal ultrasonography Prospective Studies Twins Ultrasonography, Prenatal |
| title | Clinical significance of echogenic amniotic fluid |
| url | https://sfx.bib-bvb.de/sfx_tum?ctx_ver=Z39.88-2004&ctx_enc=info:ofi/enc:UTF-8&ctx_tim=2025-01-20T15%3A35%3A12IST&url_ver=Z39.88-2004&url_ctx_fmt=infofi/fmt:kev:mtx:ctx&rfr_id=info:sid/primo.exlibrisgroup.com:primo3-Article-proquest_cross&rft_val_fmt=info:ofi/fmt:kev:mtx:journal&rft.genre=article&rft.atitle=Clinical%20significance%20of%20echogenic%20amniotic%20fluid&rft.jtitle=Journal%20of%20clinical%20ultrasound&rft.au=Petrikovsky,%20Boris&rft.date=1998-05&rft.volume=26&rft.issue=4&rft.spage=191&rft.epage=193&rft.pages=191-193&rft.issn=0091-2751&rft.eissn=1097-0096&rft.coden=JCULDD&rft_id=info:doi/10.1002/(SICI)1097-0096(199805)26:4%3C191::AID-JCU2%3E3.0.CO;2-8&rft_dat=%3Cproquest_cross%3E79833582%3C/proquest_cross%3E%3Curl%3E%3C/url%3E&disable_directlink=true&sfx.directlink=off&sfx.report_link=0&rft_id=info:oai/&rft_pqid=79833582&rft_id=info:pmid/9572381&rfr_iscdi=true |