IMR Press / CEOG / Volume 48 / Issue 5 / DOI: 10.31083/j.ceog4805191
Open Access Original Research
Single umbilical artery: a continuous dilemma and challenge in obstetric management
Show Less
1 Department of “Mother and Child”, University of Medicine and Pharmacy of Craiova, 200349 Craiova, Romania
2 Emergency Clinical County Hospital of Craiova, 200642 Craiova, Romania
3 Department of Pharmacology, University of Medicine and Pharmacy of Craiova, 200349 Craiova, Romania
4 Department of Anesthesiology and Intensive Care, “Nicolae Testemitanu” State University of Medicine and Pharmacy Chisinau, 2004 Chisinau, Moldova
5 “Timofei Mosneaga” Republican Clinical Hospital Chisinau, 2025 Chisinau, Moldova
6 Department of Internal Medicine, Faculty of Medicine, University “Ovidius” Constanta, 900527 Constanta, Romania
7 University Regional Emergency Hospital of Constanta, 900675 Constanta, Romania
8 Department of Obstetrics and Gynecology, Faculty of Medicine, University “Ovidius” Constanta, 900527 Constanta, Romania
9 Academy of Romanian Scientists, 050045 Bucharest, Romania
*Correspondence: ticaandrei2002@yahoo.com (Andrei Adrian Tica); irinatica@gmail.com (Irina Tica)
Clin. Exp. Obstet. Gynecol. 2021, 48(5), 1200–1205; https://doi.org/10.31083/j.ceog4805191
Submitted: 14 April 2021 | Revised: 25 June 2021 | Accepted: 28 June 2021 | Published: 15 October 2021
Copyright: © 2021 The Author(s). Published by IMR Press.
This is an open access article under the CC BY 4.0 license (https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/).
Abstract

Background: The single umbilical artery (SUA), an entity with almost unknown etiology, is still subject to discussion regarding its clinical significance, especially when it is an isolated discovery (iSUA). Methods: This retrospective study focused on the evaluation of fetuses with ultrasound proven SUA during second trimester screening. These fetuses were carefully investigated for other malformations. The respective pregnancies were attentively followed up and the newborns were evaluated confirming SUA. Results: The incidence of SUA was 0.57%, with 34.6% of these fetuses having associated abnormalities being 19.2% cardiovascular, 15.3% gastrointestinal, 11.5% cerebral, 7.6% osteomuscular and 3.8% urogenital. Aneuploidy was present in 8% of these infants. These rates were significantly greater compared with those noticed in “normal” three vessels umbilical cord (TVC) fetuses (control group) (p < 0.001). Similar relations were found for the rates of IUGR and/or SGA, polyhydramnios and oligohydramnios (p < 0.001). Interestingly, in iSUA group (65.4% of all SUA cases), only the rate of oligohydramnios was significantly increased compared with the control group (p = 0.038). Furthermore, in a dichorionic diamniotic twin pregnancy, with only one fetus revealing iSUA, the “affected” fetus paradoxically weighted more than the “healthy” one. Conclusion: We concluded that SUA is an important finding during morphological ultrasound examination. When associated with other anomalies, a fetal karyotype is mandatory due to the increased risk of aneuploidy. Furthermore, the pregnancy should be meticulously monitored in order to promptly diagnose other developmental anomalies associated with abnormalities of the amniotic fluid volume and to detect any anatomical anomalies missed at the initial prenatal evaluation. Finally, we concluded that diabetes mellitus represents a strong favoring condition for SUA with first pregnancy also being a contributor.

Keywords
Single umbilical artery (SUA)
Malformation
Aneuploidy
Trisomy
Oligohydramnios
Polyhydramnios
Funding
119.1/2019/PANMED SRL Craiova, Romania
Share
Back to top