Combination of vibroacoustic stimulation and acute variables of mFBP as a simple assessment method of low-risk fetuses

References

• Hueston W J. Techniques for antepartum fetal surveillance. Am Fam Phys 1991; 44: 893–904
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Kontopoulos E V, Vintzileos A M. Condition-specific antepartum fetal testing. Am J Obstet Gynecol 2004; 191: 1546–1551
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Vintzileos A M. Antenatal assessment for the detection of fetal asphyxia: an evidence-based approach using indication-specific testing. Ann N Y Acad Sci 2000; 900: 137–150
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Manning F A, Platt L D, Sipos L. Antepartum fetal evaluation: development of a fetal biophysical profile. Am J Obstet Gynecol 1980; 136: 787–795
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Manning F A, Bondaji N, Harman C R, Casiro O, Menticoglou S, Morrison I, Berk D J. Fetal assessment based on fetal biophysical profile scoring. VIII. The incidence of cerebral palsy in tested and untested perinates. Am J Obstet Gynecol 1998; 178: 696–703
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Petrović O, Frković A, Rukavina B. Efficacy of the fetal biophysical profile and its individual components in predicting poor perinatal outcome. Acta Fac Med Fluminensis 1993; 18: 99–102
   Google Scholar
• Vintzileos A M, Campbell W A, Ingardia C J, Nochimson D J. The fetal biophysical profile and its predictive value. Obstet Gynecol 1983; 62: 271–278
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Manning F A. Fetal biophysical profile: a critical appraisal. Clin Obstet Gynecol 2002; 45: 975–985
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Vintzileos A M, Campbell W A, Nochimson D J, Weinbaum P J. The use and misuse of the fetal biophysical profile. Am J Obstet Gynecol 1987; 156: 527–533
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Habek D, Jugović D, Hodek B, Herman R, Matičević A, Habek JČ, Pisl Z, Salihagić A. Fetal biophysical profile and cerebro-umbilical ratio in assessment of brain damage in growth restricted fetuses. Eur J Obstet Gynecol Reprod Biol 2004; 114: 29–34
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Manning F A, Morrison I, Lange I R, Harman C R, Chamberlain P F. Fetal biophysical profile scoring: selective use of the nonstress test. Am J Obstet Gynecol 1987; 156: 709–712
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Nageotte M P, Towers C V, Asrat T, Freeman R K. Perinatal outcome with the modified biophysical profile. Am J Obstet Gynecol 1994; 170: 1672–1676
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Nageotte M P, Towers C V, Asrat T, Freeman R K, Dorchester W. The value of a negative antepartum test: contraction stress test and modified biophysical profile. Obstet Gynecol 1994; 84: 231–234
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Ott W J, Mora G, Arias F, Sunderji S, Sheldon G. Comparison of the modified fetal biophysical profile to a “new” biophysical profile incorporating the middle cerebral artery to umbilical artery velocity flow systolic/diastolic ratio. Am J Obstet Gynecol 1998; 178: 1346–1353
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Ou X D, Liu X X, Liang R X. The application of modified fetal biophysical profile scoring for prenatal monitoring. Chung Hua Fu Chan Ko Tsa Chih 1994; 29: 213–216
   Google Scholar
• Petrović O. Modified fetal biophysical profile. Gynaecol Perinatol 1993; 3: 161–164
   Google Scholar
• Olesen A G, Svare J A. Decreased fetal movements: background, assessment, and clinical management. Acta Obstet Gynecol Scand 2004; 83: 818–826
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Pillai M, James D. The importance of the behavioural state in biophysical assessment of the term human fetus. Br J Obstet Gynaecol 1990; 97: 1130–1134
   PubMedGoogle Scholar
• Petrović O, Frković A, Matejčić N. Fetal biophysical profile and vibratory acoustic stimulation in high-risk pregnancies. Int J Gynecol Obstet 1995; 50: 11–15
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Petrović O, Škunca E, Matejčić N. A simplified fetal biophysical profile. Int J Gynecol Obstet 1998; 61: 9–14
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• DiPietro J A. Neurobehavioral assessment before birth. Ment Retard Dev Disabil Res Rev 2005; 11: 4–13
   PubMedGoogle Scholar
• Gingras J L, O'Donnell K J. State control in the substance-exposed fetus. I. The fetal neurobehavioral profile: an assessment of fetal state, arousal, and regulation competency. Ann N Y Acad Sci 1998; 846: 262–276
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Groome L J, Watson J E. Fetal behavioural states. J Maternal Fetal Invest 1992; 2: 183–194
   Google Scholar
• Mulder E JH, Boersma M, Meeuse M, van der Wal M, van de Weerd E, Visser G HA. Patterns of breathing movements in the near-term human fetus: relationship to behavioural states. Early Hum Dev 1994; 36: 127–135
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Almli C R, Ball R H, Wheeler M E. Human fetal and neonatal movement patterns: gender differences and fetal-to-neonatal continuity. Dev Psychobiol 2001; 38: 252–273
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Devoe L D, Youssef A A, Castillo R A, Croom C S. Fetal biophysical activities in third-trimester pregnancies complicated by diabetes mellitus. Am J Obstet Gynecol 1994; 171: 298–305
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• DiPietro J A, Hodgson D M, Costigan K A, Hilton S C, Johnson T R. Fetal neurobehavioral development. Child Dev 1996; 67: 2553–2567
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Mulder E JH, Morssink L P, Van der Schee T, Visser G HA. Acute maternal alcohol consumption disrupts behavioral state organization in the near-term fetus. Pediatr Res 1998; 44: 774–779
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Rotmensch S, Celentano C, Liberati M, Sadan O, Glezerman M. The effect of antenatal steroid administration on the fetal response to vibroacoustic stimulation. Acta Obstet Gynecol Scand 1999; 78: 847–851
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Gagnon R, Hunse C, Carmichael L, Fellows F, Patrick J. Effects of vibratory acoustic stimulation on human fetal breathing and gross fetal body movements near term. Am J Obstet Gynecol 1986; 155: 1227–1230
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Inglis S R, Druzin M L, Wagner W E, Kogut E. The use of vibroacoustic stimulation during the abnormal or equivocal biophysical profile. Obstet Gynecol 1993; 82: 371–374
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Prodan M, Petrović O, Frković A, Rukavina B. Effect of external vibratory acoustic stimulation on fetal heart activity and movements. Gynaecol Perinatol 1992; 1: 33–35
   Google Scholar
• van Heteren C F, Boekkooi P F, Jongsma H W, Nijhuis J G. Responses to vibroacoustic stimulation in a fetus with an encephalocele compared to responses of normal fetuses. J Perinat Med 2000; 28: 306–308
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Sarinoglu C, Dell J, Mercer B M, Sibai B M. Fetal startle response observed under ultrasonography: a good predictor of a reassuring biophysical profile. Obstet Gynecol 1996; 88: 599–602
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Kurjak A, Azumendi G, Veček N, Kupešić S, Solak M, Varga D, Chervenak F. Fetal hand movements and facial expression in normal pregnancy studied by four-dimensional ultrasonograpy. J Perinat Med 2003; 31: 496–508
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Kurjak A, Stanojević M, Andonotopo W, Salihagić-Kadić A, Carrera J M, Azumendi G. Behavioral pattern continuity from prenatal to postnatal life – a study by four-dimensional (4D) ultrasonograpy. J Perinat Med 2004; 32: 346–353
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Kurjak A, Stanojević M, Azumendi G, Carrera J M. The potential of four-dimensional (4D) ultrasonograpy in the assessment of fetal awareness. J Perinat Med 2005; 33: 46–53
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar