Skip to main page content
U.S. flag

An official website of the United States government

Dot gov

The .gov means it’s official.
Federal government websites often end in .gov or .mil. Before sharing sensitive information, make sure you’re on a federal government site.

Https

The site is secure.
The https:// ensures that you are connecting to the official website and that any information you provide is encrypted and transmitted securely.

Access keys NCBI Homepage MyNCBI Homepage Main Content Main Navigation
Review
. 2018 Feb;26(1):6-15.
doi: 10.1177/1742271X17747139. Epub 2018 Feb 7.

Is ultrasound screening for vasa praevia clinically justified and a financially viable screening test? A literature review

Affiliations
Review

Is ultrasound screening for vasa praevia clinically justified and a financially viable screening test? A literature review

Gillian Coleman et al. Ultrasound. 2018 Feb.

Abstract

Vasa praevia is an obstetric complication currently not screened for within the United Kingdom, which if undetected prenatally can lead to fetal death when the membranes rupture. Internationally, guidelines are available providing guidance on the best screening policy and management pathways. However, the UK National Screening Committee and Royal College of Obstetricians and Gynaecologists do not support screening due to a lack of evidence. Recent studies explore the ability of ultrasound to detect vasa praevia prenatally in both the general and high-risk populations. Whilst there is no consensus on the 'best' screening strategy, the majority of authors note that targeted screening of the high-risk population is the most achievable and cost-effective strategy. Although not infallible, a standard screening protocol could identify the majority of cases in the high-risk group. Introduction of a screening strategy would affect training needs of professionals within the UK and would have implications on the need to produce guidelines on management and quality assurance. Further research is also needed to define a relevant high-risk population and explore how this would impact on service provision. This review explores the current evidence base for systematic screening and the implications for service.

Keywords: Vasa praevia; antepartum haemorrhage; bilobed placenta; screening; ultrasound; velamentous cord insertion.

PubMed Disclaimer

Figures

Figure 1.
Figure 1.
Results of the literature search.

References

    1. Derbala Y, Grochal F, Jeanty P. Vasa previa. J Prenatal Med 2007; 1: 2–13. - PMC - PubMed
    1. Tuffnell D. Obstetric haemorrhage. In: Magowan BA, Owen P, Thomson A. (eds). Clinical obstetrics and gynaecology, 3rd ed London: Saunders Elsevier, 2014, pp. 275–282.
    1. Oyelese Y, Smulian JC. Placenta previa, placenta accreta and vasa praevia. Obstet Gynecol 2006; 107: 927–940. - PubMed
    1. Mukherjee S, Bhide A. Antepartum haemorrhage. Obstet Gynaecol Reprod Med 2008; 18: 335–339.
    1. Donnolley N, Halliday LE, Oyelese Y. Vasa praevia: a descriptive review of existing literature and the evolving role of ultrasound in prenatal screening. AJUM 2013; 16: 71–76. - PMC - PubMed

LinkOut - more resources