HEALTH OF WOMAN. 2019.4(140): 50–54; doi 10.15574/HW.2019.140.50

Golyanovskiy V. O., Didyk Ye. O.
Shupyk National Medical Academy of Postgraduate Education, Kiev

Pregnant women with intrauterine growth restriction (IUGR) have an increased risk of adverse perinatal and long-term complications compared with the birth of children with normal body weight. Thus, IUGR is one of the main challenges for the global health system, especially in poor and developing countries. Morpho-functional studies of the placentas help in determining the causes of IUGR, and therefore, timely prevent complications in pregnant women with IUGR.
The objective: The purpose of this study is to investigate various morphometric and pathomorphological changes in the placenta, including inflammatory, in cases of IUGR, and to establish a correlation of these results with the etiology and complications for the fetus.
Materials and methods. In the current study, 54 placentas of the fetuses with IUGR (the main group) were compared with 50 placentas of the fetuses with normal development (control group). The criteria for the inclusion of IUGR were gestational age more than 30 weeks and all fetuses with a weight less than 10th percentile for this period of pregnancy. The placenta material was studied pathomorphologically with laboratory screening for infection and inflammation. Similarly, the results were determined for placentas of the fetuses with normal development compared to placentas with IUGR.
Results. The placenta study showed the presence of calcification in the case of IUGR, as well as in the case of prolonged pregnancy. However, calcification of the placenta in the case of IUGR was more progressive compared with placenta in the normal pregnancy. In addition, the presence of intrauterine infection and inflammation was observed, which could also lead to an adverse outcome for the further progression of pregnancy with IUGR.
Conclusion. A comparative macro- and microscopic pathomorphological study of the placentas in the two groups has shown a significant increase in the pathological changes in all the anatomical structures of the fetuses with IUGR.
Key words: Intrauterine growth restriction (IUGR), fetal weight, pathomorphological changes of the placenta.

REFERENCES

Bamfo JE, Odibo AO. 2011. Diagnosis and management of fetal growth restriction. J Pregnancy 2011:640715. https://doi.org/10.1155/2011/640715; PMid:21547092 PMCid:PMC3087156

Resnik R. 2002. Intrauterine growth restriction. Obstetr Gynecol 99:490-496. https://doi.org/10.1016/S0029-7844(01)01780-X

Sawant LD, Venkat S. 2013. Comparative Analysis of Normal versus Fetal Growth Restriction in Pregnancy: The Significance of Maternal Body Mass Index, NutritionalStatus, Anaemia, and Ultrasonography Screening. Int Reproduct Med 2013:671954. https://doi.org/10.1155/2013/671954; PMid:25763389 PMCid:PMC4334045

Almasry SM, Elfayomy AK. 2012. Morphometric analysis of terminal villi and gross Morphological changes in the placentae of term idiopathic intrauterine growth restriction.Tissue and Cell 44:214-219. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.tice.2012.03.006; PMid:22541804

Thame M, Osmond C, Bennett F, Wilks R, Forrester T. 2004. Fetal growth is directly related to maternal anthropometry and placental volume. Eur J Clin Nutrit 58:894-900. https://doi.org/10.1038/sj.ejcn.1601909; PMid:15164110

Vedmedovska N, Rezeberga D, Teibe U, Melderis I, Donders GG. 2011. Placental pathologyin fetal growth restriction. Eur J Obstetr Gynecol Reproduct Biol 155:36-40. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ejogrb.2010.11.017; PMid:21183268

Baschat AA, Hecher K. 2004. Fetal growth restriction due to placental disease. Seminars inPerinatology 28:67-80. https://doi.org/10.1053/j.semperi.2003.10.014

Ashurova NG, Ismatova MI. 2015. Sovremennyi vzglyad na problemu zaderzhki vnutriutrobnogo razvitiya ploda (Obzornaya statya). Nauka. Myisl. 3:13–18.

Voloschuk IN. 2002. Morfologicheskie osnovyi i patogenez platsentarnoy nedostatochnosti. Avtoref. disc. d-ra med. nauk. M.

de Onis M, Blossner M, Villar J. 1998. Levels and patterns of intrauterine growth retardationin developing countries. Eur J Clin Nutri 52:S5–15.

Imdad A, Yakoob MY, Siddiqui S, Bhutta ZA. 2011. Screening and triage of intrauterinegrowth restriction (IUGR) in general population and high risk pregnancies: a systematic review with a focus on reduction of IUGR related still births. BMC Public Health 11:S1. https://doi.org/10.1186/1471-2458-11-S3-S1; PMid:21501426 PMCid:PMC3231882

Forma №013-2/0, zatverdzhena Nakazom MOZ Ukrainy № 417 vid 19.08.2004 r.

Autopsy Performance & Reporting, Third Edition. Edited by Kim A. Collins, MD. Northfield, Illinois, USA, CAP Press. Ch18:149-184. 2017.

Rosai and Ackerman’s Surgical Pathology Seven edition/edited by J.Rosai– Elsevier Inc 1; 2,3: 25–95. 2011.

Patologiya platsentyi. Red. Yu.G. Antipkina, T.D. Zadorozhnaya, O.I. Parnitskaya. 2016. K, OOO «Atopol»: 127.

Raio L, Ghezzi F, Cromi A, Nelle M, Durig P, Schneider H. 2004. The thickheterogeneous (jellylike) placenta: a strong predictor of adverse pregnancy outcome. Prenat Diagn 24:182-188. https://doi.org/10.1002/pd.828; PMid:15057950

Biswas S, Ghosh SK. 2008. Gross morphological changes of placentas associated with intrauterine growth restriction of fetuses: a case control study. Early Human Development 84:357-362. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.earlhumdev.2007.09.017; PMid:18093757

Kingdom J, Huppertz B, Seaward G, Kaufmann P. 2000. Development of the placental villous tree and its consequences for fetal growth. Eur J Obstetr Gynecol Reproduct Biol 92:35-43. https://doi.org/10.1016/S0301-2115(00)00423-1