Top

Archives of Gynecology and Obstetrics

Published in:

01-11-2007 | Original Article

Two- versus three-dimensional ultrasound in the second and third trimester of pregnancy: impact on recognition and maternal–fetal bonding. A prospective pilot study

Authors: Olav Lapaire, Judith Alder, Regina Peukert, Wolfgang Holzgreve, Sevgi Tercanli

Published in: Archives of Gynecology and Obstetrics | Issue 5/2007

Abstract

Objective

To assess the impact of three-dimensional (3D) versus two-dimensional (2D) ultrasound (US) on maternal–fetal bonding.

Study design

Prospective randomized pilot study among low risk women with singleton fetuses in the second and third trimester. Dependent on the randomization pattern, US was commenced either with 2D US or 3D US and the effects were recorded with standardized questionnaires.

Results

Sixty patients were included. Although the quality of 2D US, assessed by the examinator, was superior to 3D US, maternal recognition was higher with 3-D US (P = 0.004). With 2D US, nulliparous patients had significantly more difficulties visualizing the fetus, than multiparous (P = 0.03). However, the maternal preference of 3D US had no significant impact on maternal–fetal bonding.

Conclusion

Ultrasound had no significant effect on maternal–fetal bonding. Three-dimensional images may facilitate recognition of the fetus, but 3D US did not have higher impact on maternal–fetal bonding. This finding may be a reason not to consider 3D ultrasound for routine scanning.

Available only for authorised users

Ji EK, Pretorius DH, Newton R, Uyan K, Hull AD, Hollenbach K, Nelson TR (2005) Effects of ultrasound on maternal–fetal bonding: a comparison of two- and three dimensional imaging. Ultrasound Obstet Gynecol 25:473–477PubMedCrossRef

Pretorius DH, Uyan KM, Newton R, Hull A, James G, Nelson T (2001) Effects of US on maternal–fetal bonding: 2D versus 3D. Ultrasound Obstet Gynecol 18(Suppl 1):20 (Abstract F35)

Cranley MS (1981) Development of a tool for the measurement of maternal attachment during pregnancy. Nurs Res 30:281–284PubMedCrossRef

Timor-Tritsch IE, Platt LD (2002) Three-dimensional ultrasound experiences in obstetrics. Curr Opin Obstet Gynecol 14:569–575PubMedCrossRef

Dyson RL, Pretorius DH, Budorick NE, Johnson DD, Sklansky MS, Cantrell CJ, Lai S, Nelson TR (2000) Three-dimensional ultrasound in the evaluation of fetal anomalies. Ultrasound Obstet Gynecol 16:321–328PubMedCrossRef

Heidrich SM, Cranley MS (1988) Effect of fetal movement, ultrasound scans, and amniocentesis on maternal–fetal attachment. Nurs Res 38: 81–84

Siddiqui A, Hagglof B (2000) Does maternal prenatal attachment predict postnatal mother-infant interaction?. Early Hum Dev 59:13–25PubMedCrossRef

Pretorius DH, Nelson TR (1995) Fetal face visualization using three dimensional ultrasonography. J Ultrasound Med 14:349–356PubMed

Nelson TR, Elvins TT (1993) Visualization of 3D ultrasound data. IEEE Comput Graph Appl 13:50–57CrossRef

10.

Chudleigh T (1999) Scanning for pleasure. Ultrasound Obstet Gynecol 14:369–371PubMedCrossRef

11.

Brown GF (1988) Short-term impact of fetal imaging on prenatal stress and anxiety. Pre Peri Nat Psychol 3:25–40

12.

Zlotogorski Z, Tadmor O, Duniec E, Rabinowitz R, Diamant Y (1995) The effect of the amount of feedback on anxiety levels during ultrasound scanning. J Clin Ultrasound 24:21–24CrossRef

13.

Langer M, Ringler M, Reinold E (1988) Psychological effects of ultrasound examinations: changes of body perception and child image in pregnancy. J Psychosomatic Obstet Gynecol 8:199–208

14.

Eurenius K, Axelsson O, Gällstedt-Fransson I, Sjöden PO (1997) Perception of information, expectations and experiences among women and their partners attending a second-trimester routine ultrasound scan. Ultrasound Obstet Gynecol 9:86–90PubMedCrossRef

15.

Villeneuve C, Laroche C, Lippman A, Marrache M (1988) Psychological aspects of ultrasound imaging during pregnancy. Can J Psychiatry 33:530–538PubMed

16.

Eurenius K, Axelsson O, Gällstedt-Fransson I, Sjöden PO (1997) Perception of information, expectations and experience among women and their partners attending a second-trimester routine ultrasound scan. Ultrasound Obstet Gynecol 9:86–90PubMedCrossRef

Title: Two- versus three-dimensional ultrasound in the second and third trimester of pregnancy: impact on recognition and maternal–fetal bonding. A prospective pilot study
Authors: Olav Lapaire
Judith Alder
Regina Peukert
Wolfgang Holzgreve
Sevgi Tercanli
Publication date: 01-11-2007
Publisher: Springer-Verlag
Published in: Archives of Gynecology and Obstetrics / Issue 5/2007
Print ISSN: 0932-0067
Electronic ISSN: 1432-0711
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s00404-007-0368-7

Keynote webinar | Spotlight on medication adherence

Springer Medicine

Two- versus three-dimensional ultrasound in the second and third trimester of pregnancy: impact on recognition and maternal–fetal bonding. A prospective pilot study

Abstract

Objective

Study design

Results

Conclusion

Keynote webinar | Spotlight on medication adherence

Springer Medicine

Abstract

Objective

Study design

Results

Conclusion

Please log in to get access to this content

Other articles of this Issue 5/2007

Isolated fetal intracardiac hyperechogenic focus associated with neonatal outcome and triple test results

The value of frozen sectioning for the evaluation of resection margins in cases of conization

Salmonella ovarian abscess following travel diarrhoea episode

Once a cesarean always a cesarean? A computer-assisted decision analysis

Complex conotruncal cardiac anomalies consecutively in three siblings from a consanguineous family possibly associated with maternal hyperhomocysteinemia

Morbidity associated with posterior intravaginal slingplasty for uterovaginal and vault prolapse