The Evidence for Abandoning the Amniotic Fluid Index in Favor of the Single Deepest Pocket

 

 Buy Article Permissions and Reprints

ABSTRACT

This study assessed whether the amniotic fluid index (AFI) or the single deepest pocket (SDP) is the best technique to estimate amniotic fluid volume. The AFI and SDP were compared to a dye-determined or directly measured amniotic fluid volume. A PUBMED search from 1990 to 2006 was conducted using the search terms “single deepest pocket” or “largest vertical pocket” or “maximum vertical pocket” or “2X1 pocket” AND “amniotic fluid index”. One study compared the AFI and SDP to a dye-determined amniotic fluid volume. There were 1219 publications that used the search term SDP-LVP-MVP versus 4378 using AFI. Twenty publications contained both the AFI and SDP, but only six compared the AFI and SDP. Both the AFI and the SDP poorly identified abnormal amniotic fluid volumes, and neither technique was superior to the other. The AFI identifies a significantly greater number of women as having oligohydramnios versus the SDP but without any difference in perinatal outcomes. Compared with SDP, AFI excessively characterizes a greater number of pregnancies as having oligohydramnios leading to more interventions without improvement in perinatal outcome. The AFI should be abandoned and the SDP used to estimate amniotic fluid volume.

REFERENCES

• 1 American College of Obstetricians and Gynecologists .Ultrasonography in Pregnancy. ACOG Practice Bulletin No 58. Washington DC; ACOG 2004
  Google Scholar
• 2 Phelan J P, Ahn M O, Smith C V, Rutherford C V, Anderson E. Amniotic fluid index measurements during pregnancy.  J Reprod Med. 1987;  32 601-604
  PubMedGoogle Scholar
• 3 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
  CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
• 4 Clark S L, Sabey P, Jolley K. Nonstress testing with acoustic stimulation and amniotic fluid volume assessment. 5973 tests without unexpected fetal death.  Am J Obstet Gynecol. 1989;  160 694-697
  CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
• 5 Manning F A, Baskett T F, Morrison I, Lange I. Fetal biophysical profile scoring: a prospective study in 1,184 high-risk patients.  Am J Obstet Gynecol. 1981;  140 289-294
  CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
• 6 Manning F A, Harman C R, Morrison I, Menticoglou S, Lange I R, Johnson J M. Fetal assessment based on fetal biophysical profile scoring. IV. An analysis of perinatal morbidity and mortality.  Am J Obstet Gynecol. 1990;  162 703-709
  CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
• 7 Chamberlain P F, Manning F A, Morrison I, Harman C R, Lange I R. Ultrasound evaluation of amniotic fluid volume. I. The relationship of marginal and decreased amniotic fluid volumes to perinatal outcome.  Am J Obstet Gynecol. 1984;  150 245-249
  PubMedGoogle Scholar
• 8 Magann E F, Isler C M, Chauhan S P, Martin Jr J N. Amniotic fluid volume estimation and the biophysical profile: A confusion of criteria.  Obstet Gynecol. 2000;  96 640-642
  CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
• 9 Rutherford S E, Phelan J P, Smith C V, Jacobs N. The four quadrant assessment of amniotic fluid volume: an adjunct to antepartum fetal heart rate testing.  Obstet Gynecol. 1987;  70 353-356
  PubMedGoogle Scholar
• 10 Moore T R. Superiority of the four quadrant sum over the single deepest pocket technique in ultrasonographic identification of abnormal amniotic fluid volumes.  Am J Obstet Gynecol. 1990;  163 762-767
  PubMedGoogle Scholar
• 11 Magann E F, Chauhan S P, Barrilleaux P S, Whitworth N S, Martin Jr J N. Amniotic fluid index and single deepest pocket: Weak indicators of abnormal amniotic volumes.  Obstet Gynecol. 2000;  96 737-740
  CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
• 12 Dildy III G A, Lira N, Moise Jr K J, Riddle D G, Deter R L. Amniotic fluid volume assessment: comparison of ultrasonographic estimates versus direct measurements with a dye-dilution technique in human pregnancy.  Am J Obstet Gynecol. 1992;  167 986-994
  PubMedGoogle Scholar
• 13 Magann E F, Nolan T E, Hess L W, Martin R W, Whitworth N S, Morrison J C. Measurements of amniotic fluid volume: accuracy of ultrasonography techniques.  Am J Obstet Gynecol. 1992;  167 1533-1537
  CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
• 14 Horsager R, Nathan L, Leveno K J. Correlation of measured amniotic fluid volume and sonographic predictions of oligohydramnios.  Obstet Gynecol. 1994;  83 955-958
  PubMedGoogle Scholar
• 15 Sepulveda W, Flack N J, Fisk N M. Direct volume measurement at midtrimester amnioinfusion in relation to ultrasonographic indexes of amniotic fluid volume.  Am J Obstet Gynecol. 1994;  170 1160-1163
  PubMedGoogle Scholar
• 16 Zaretsky M V, McIntire D D, Reichel T F, Twickler D M. Correlation of measured amniotic fluid volume to sonographic and magnetic resonance predictions.  Am J Obstet Gynecol. 2004;  191 2148-2153
  CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
• 17 Moore T R, Cayle J E. The amniotic fluid index in normal pregnancy.  Am J Obstet Gynecol. 1990;  162 1168-1173
  CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
• 18 Chauhan S P, Magann E F, Morrison J C. Invalid equation to describe the amniotic fluid index in normal pregnancy.  (letter) Am J Obstet Gynecol. 1994;  170 1209-1210
  PubMedGoogle Scholar
• 19 Nwosu E C, Welch C R, Manasse P R, Walkinshaw S A. Longitudinal assessment of amniotic fluid index.  Br J Obstet Gynaecol. 1993;  100 816-819
  PubMedGoogle Scholar
• 20 Magann E F, Sanderson M, Martin Jr J N, Chauhan S P. The amniotic fluid index, single deepest pocket, and two-diameter pocket in normal human pregnancy.  Am J Obstet Gynecol. 2000;  182 1581-1588
  CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
• 21 Gramellini D, Delle Chiaie L, Piantelli G, Sansebastiano L, Fieni S, Vadora E. Sonographic assessment of amniotic fluid volume between 11 and 24 weeks of gestation: construction of reference intervals related to gestational age.  Ultrasound Obstet Gynecol. 2001;  17 410-415
  CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
• 22 Miyamura T, Masuzaki H, Miyamoto M, Ishimaru T. Comparison between the single deepest pocket and amniotic fluid index in predicting fetal distress in small-for-gestational age fetuses.  Acta Obstet Gynecol Scand. 1997;  76 123-127
  PubMedGoogle Scholar
• 23 Myles T D, Santolaya-Forgas J. Normal ultrasonic evaluation of amniotic fluid volume in low-risk patients at term.  J Reprod Med. 2002;  47 621-624
  PubMedGoogle Scholar
• 24 Youssef A, Abdulla S A, Sayed E H, Salem H, Abdelalim A M, Devoe L D. Superiority of amniotic fluid index over amniotic fluid pocket measurement for predicting bad fetal outcome.  South Med J. 1993;  86 426-429
  CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
• 25 Magann E F, Chauhan S P, Martin Jr J N. Is the amniotic fluid volume predictive of fetal acidosis at delivery?.  Aust N Z J Obstet Gynaecol. 2003;  43 129-133
  CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
• 26 Ajayi R A, Soothill P W. Ultrasound assessment of amniotic fluid volume: a comparison of the single deepest pool and amniotic fluid index to predict perinatal morbidity.  Ultrasound Obstet Gynecol. 1991;  1 401-404
  PubMedGoogle Scholar
• 27 Fischer R L, McDonnell M, Bianculli K W, Perry R L, Hediger M L, Scholl T O. Amniotic fluid volume estimation in postdate pregnancy: A comparison of techniques.  Obstet Gynecol. 1993;  81 698-704
  PubMedGoogle Scholar
• 28 Morris J M, Thompson K, Smithey J et al.. The usefulness of ultrasound assessment of amniotic fluid in predicting adverse outcome in prolonged pregnancy: a prospective blinded observational study.  BJOG. 2003;  110 989-994
  CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
• 29 Verrotti C, Bedocchi L, Piantelli G, Cavallotti D, Fiene S, Gramellini D. Acta Biomed. 2004;  75 Suppl 1 67-70
  PubMed
• 30 Magann E F, Doherty D A, Field K, Chauhan S P, Muffley P E, Morrison J C. Biophysical profile with amniotic fluid volume assessments.  Obstet Gynecol. 2004;  104 5-10
  PubMedGoogle Scholar
• 31 Chauhan S P, Doherty D A, Magann E F, Cahanding F, Moreno F, Klausen J H. Amniotic fluid index vs. single deepest pocket technique during modified biophysical profile: a randomized clinical trial.  Am J Obstet Gynecol. 2004;  191 661-667
  CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
• 32 Alfirevic Z, Luckas M, Walkinshaw S A, McFarlane M, Curran R. A randomized comparison between amniotic fluid index and maximum pool depth in the monitoring of post-term pregnancy.  Br J Obstet Gynaecol. 1997;  104 207-211
  PubMedGoogle Scholar
• 33 Moses J, Doherty D, Magann E F, Chauhan S P, Morrison J C. A randomized clinical trial of the intrapartum assessment of amniotic fluid volume: amniotic fluid index versus the single deepest pocket technique.  Am J Obstet Gynecol. 2004;  190 1564-1569
  CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
• 34 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
  CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
• 35 Miller D A, Rabello Y A, Paul R H. The modified biophysical profile: antepartum testing in the 1990s.  Am J Obstet Gynecol. 1996;  174 812-817
  CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
• 36 Manning F A, Snijders R, Harman C R, Nicolaides K, Menticoglou S, Morrison I. Fetal biophysical profile score. VI. Correlation with antepartum umbilical venous fetal pH.  Am J Obstet Gynecol. 1993;  169 755-763
  CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
• 37 Dayal A K, Manning F A, Berck D J, Mussalli G M, Avila C, Harman C R, Menticoglu S. Fetal death after normal biophysical profile score: An eighteen-year experience.  1999;  181 1231-6
  PubMedGoogle Scholar
• 38 Manning F A, Bondaji N, Harman C R et al.. Fetal assessment based on fetal biophysical profile scoring. VIII. The incidence of cerebral palsy in tested and untested perinates.  Am J Obstet Gynecol. 1998;  178 696-706
  PubMedGoogle Scholar

Suneet P ChauhanM.D. 

Aurora Health Care, 8905 W. Lincoln Ave

PAC, West Allis, WI 53227