RESEARCH. CONNECTED.

Explore the scholarly record.

Discover prefix ownership, publishers, journals and DOI metadata. Understand the data behind every publication.

MV‑Flow imaging for predicting adverse pregnancy outcomes in gestational diabetes mellitus

Qingxia Zhu, Huimin Hu, Fang Yang, Jun Shi, Guilan Yang

DOI10.21203/rs.3.rs-10998093/v1
PublisherSpringer Science and Business Media LLC
Journal / Source—
Published2026-10-11
Metadata Deposited2026-10-11 (updated: 2026-10-11)
Subject—
Language—
ISSN—
Typeposted-content
Volume / Issue / Pages— / — / —
Citations0
References deposited20
Access / license metadataOpen license identified License 1 ↗A reuse license does not by itself establish whether the full text is freely readable.

Abstract

Abstract Objectives To assess longitudinal placental vascular index (VI) changes using MV-Flow ultrasound in gestational diabetes mellitus (GDM) and evaluate its predictive value for adverse perinatal outcomes. Methods We enrolled 112 women with GDM from a prospective cohort of 547 singleton pregnancies screened by 75g OGTT at 24–28 weeks. Diagnosis followed IADPSG criteria; exclusions left 60 with favorable outcomes and 29 with adverse outcomes. VIUp, VIMed, and VIDown were measured in upper, mid, and lower placental regions at 22–27 + 6 and 28–33 + 6 weeks using standardized MV-Flow. We calculated VIMean and ΔVI (third minus second trimester). Conventional Doppler parameters were collected concurrently. Group differences were tested parametrically or nonparametrically. Independent predictors were identified via multivariable logistic regression; model discrimination was assessed by ROC analysis and internally validated with 1,000 bootstrap resamples. Results Pre-pregnancy BMI and fasting OGTT glucose were higher in the adverse-outcome group (both P < 0.05). Third-trimester VIMean (36.6 ± 7.8 vs. 41.7 ± 9.3; P = 0.009) and VIMed (27.3 [27.3–48.7] vs. 34.7 [34.7–54.0]; P = 0.023) were lower in the adverse-outcome group. ΔVI and all Doppler parameters showed no group differences (all P > 0.05). Independent predictors were pre-pregnancy BMI (OR = 1.18; 95% CI: 1.03–1.35; P = 0.016), fasting OGTT glucose (OR = 1.12; 95% CI: 0.99–1.26; P = 0.053), and VIMed.2 (OR = 0.94; 95% CI: 0.90–0.98; P = 0.005). The combined model (BMI + fasting OGTT glucose + VIMed.2) had AUC = 0.770 (95% CI: 0.671–0.869), versus 0.718 for BMI alone (ΔAUC = 0.052; DeLong test, P = 0.262). Bootstrap-corrected AUC was 0.743. Conclusions Third-trimester VIMed is significantly lower in GDM pregnancies with adverse outcomes. The model combining pre-pregnancy BMI, fasting OGTT glucose, and VIMed.2 shows moderate predictive ability and stable performance—supporting its use as an adjunctive risk-stratification tool in GDM.