Amniotic Fluid - 7 - Complications Related to Polyhydramnios
Similarly, Biggio and colleagues (Obstet Gynecol 1999;94:773-7) compared 370 women with singleton pregnancies beyond 20 weeks' gestation and hydramnios with 36,426 controls who had normal amniotic fluid volumes. “The perinatal mortality rate in all women with hydramnios was 49 per 1000 births, compared with 14 per 1000 births in the control group (P < .001). Women with hydramnios had 25 times more anomalies than controls (8.4% versus 0.3%; P < .001)…the cesarean rate was three times higher in women with hydramnios compared with controls (47.0% versus 16.4%; P < .001).” Interestingly, in their study, the increased risks were concentrated in the nondiabetic women with hydramnios.
However, as we mentioned previously, 50-60% of hydramnios is idiopathic (without an identifiable cause). So the question remains, are there increased risks to the baby if no identifiable etiology for the hydramnios is found? In other words, does the excessive fluid alone seem to contribute to or be associated with poor perinatal outcome. The scientific literature would indicate that it does. For example, Magann and colleagues (Obstet Gynecol Surv 2007;62:795-802) recently presented an extensive review dating back more than 50 years and found that idiopathic hydramnios was linked “to fetal macrosomia (in the absence of diagnosed maternal diabetes), an increase in the risk of adverse pregnancy outcomes, and a 2- to 5-fold increase in the risk of perinatal mortality.” So, what are some of the pregnancy risks, irrespective of the cause of the excessive amniotic fluid.
Common risks secondary to overdistention of the uterus include abdominal pain, premature labor and delivery, and premature rupture of membranes. There is also an increased risk of uterine rupture, although this is rare in the absence of a previous cesarean delivery or other operative uterine procedure. In the presence of severe hydramnios, especially in a woman of small stature, overdistention of the uterus can put so much pressure on the mother’s diaphragm that she has difficulty breathing in ANY position and maternal cardiorespiratory decompensation may occur under these circumstances.
Often under these circumstances, placental perfusion is also reduced, the baby develops relative placental insufficiency, and as a consequence of the baby’s (and probably the placenta’s) unhappiness, the mother develops preeclampsia. Doppler flow studies have shown a greater incidence of fetal blood flow ‘redistribution’ (an indirect indicator of ‘placental insufficiency’) in the presence of hydramnios and this is most likely due to the excessive pressure on the umbilical vessels and the placenta itself resulting in decreased fetal perfusion. Indeed, any fetal condition associated with hydramnios that places the baby in a ‘distressed’ situation, particularly, severe fetal anemia and other causes of hydrops fetalis, increases the risk for maternal preeclampsia.
Indeed, the very first obstetrical patient I ever saw die (30 years ago) had a baby with hydrops secondary to severe maternal Rh-isoimmunization and polyhydramnios. An attempt was made to transfuse the baby in utero and afterwards she was sent to the antepartum unit for monitoring. I noticed her blood pressure was elevated and checked her urine to also find 4+ proteinuria. I remember notifying her attending physician ( I was a second year resident at the time) that she appeared to be developing severe preeclampsia and was brushed off that this was simply the ‘stress of the procedure that she had just been through.’ When I came in to round on her the next morning, she was not in her bed and when I asked if she had been discharged, I was told that she had had a hypertensive crisis in the middle of the night, a cerebrovascular accident, and could not be resuscitated. The occurrence of severe maternal preeclampsia in the presence of fetal hydrops has come to be known as “mirror syndrome” in which the mother’s condition reflects (and is probably driven by) the dire fetal condition (Vidaeff, et al. J Reprod Med 2002;47:770-4). Needless to say, there are some things one NEVER forgets!
Hydramnios can also cause several complications related to the onset and course of labor. Too much fluid often leads to lack of ‘engagement’ of the fetal head in the pelvis and/or an unstable fetal lie (breech or transverse). This can be a special problem when the membranes rupture (spontaneously or artificially) because if there is no ‘presenting part’ obstructing the cervix, the umbilical cord can suddenly prolapse with the gush of fluid through the cervix into the vagina turning a relatively uncomplicated situation into an emergency. Acute release of the fluid and decompression of the uterus can also cause sudden separation of the placenta (placental abruption) from the uterine wall. Stretching of the uterine muscle (myometrium) can also result in abnormal labor patterns secondary to poor contractility (myometrial dysfunction) and at times can result in poor contraction (involution) of the uterus following delivery, a situation that is usually accompanied by post-partum hemorrhage. All of these complications contribute to the increased rate of cesarean deliveries in pregnancies with hydramnios and the increased rate of maternal and fetal complications.
One other complication which occurs frequently (and is often not thought about) in the presence of hydramnios, particularly if this is associated with diabetes or simply, with fetal macrosomia, is immaturity of fetal lung development. As we have pointed out in earlier posts, late preterm (near-term) elective delivery of a baby just because it is “too big” can have tragic consequences. It is not unusual for macrosomic babies to have a 2-3 week lag in the functional ability of their lungs at birth because excessive insulin production (hyperinsulinemia) that often accompanies macrosomia can delay the production of the lung surfactants that reduce surface tension in the alveoli and are necessary for expansion of these so that oxygen exchange can occur normally. There is nothing sadder than seeing a 10 lb baby of a diabetic mother laying in the neonatal intensive care unit struggling to survive with severe respiratory distress syndrome and persistent fetal circulation as a consequence of an elective (often cesarean) delivery.
Having discussed some of the more common complications of polyhydramnios, in our next (and final!?!) post on the topic of amniotic fluid, we will address the evaluation and management of the pregnancy with too much amniotic fluid…
Labels: diabetes, hydramnios, polyhydramnios, Rh-isoimmunization





12 Comments:
At Fri May 23, 07:28:00 AM 2008,
Anonymous said…
Dr. Trofatter,
I apologize for posting off topic, but I wanted your opinion on something. I understand there is a relationship between incompetent cervix and PCOS. I have PCOS and also had a previous D&C in September, which I understand can also be a contributing factor. My cervix measured 3.7 cm at my 20 week ultrasound this week, which I was told is very good. Does that mean I'm out of danger for developing a cervical problem should I request additional monitoring?
Thank you for your thoughts!
At Sat May 24, 02:22:00 PM 2008,
Anonymous said…
Hello again,
i am the lady that wrote to you about three weeks ago. I was eight weeks pregnant last week and we had a misscarage. I have a healthy 4 year old and on Feberuary 2007 we had a still born due to thrombosis of the ambelical cord. Now i am loosing a baby in 8 weeks after taking aspirin and Shots of Clexane.
Now i am very concerned and worried. I want to have another baby and i do not know what is happening to me.
Are there any tests that i can do to find out what is causing this to happen?
what do i do now?
At Sun May 25, 06:03:00 PM 2008,
Kenneth F. Trofatter, Jr., MD, PhD said…
To anonymous May 23: There is no "standard of care" under these circumstances. You are probably at low risk, but I will sometimes repeat the transvaginal scan at 23-24 weeks. If things look good then, I wouldn't worry about it anymore! Best of luck and thanks for writing! Dr T
At Tue May 27, 06:41:00 PM 2008,
Kenneth F. Trofatter, Jr., MD, PhD said…
To anonymous May 24: Again, I am sorry for your loss. I am not sure which post you submitted your last comment under. Can you remind me what sort of laboratory evaluation you have had done to date? Dr T
At Sun Jun 01, 08:31:00 AM 2008,
Tim H. said…
Dr. Trofatter, our niece is 8 weeks pregnant and has been told of a problem with fluid surrounding the baby. We read up on hydramnios and would like to know if anyone has encountered Cruzons as a factor because her patental grand-mother and uncle have Cruzons.
At Mon Jun 02, 07:23:00 AM 2008,
Anonymous said…
Dr. Trofatter,
Thank you for your recommendation about the repeat ultrasound. I was very glad that my doctor took my concerns seriously, but he didn't want to do ultrasound. Instead, he's going to have me come in every two weeks for manual cervix checks. I tested GBS+ at 11 weeks and I'm a little concerned pushing infection toward the cervix as well as irritating the cervix with all that manipulation. What are your thoughts?
Thanks again!
At Tue Jun 03, 06:57:00 PM 2008,
Kenneth F. Trofatter, Jr., MD, PhD said…
To Tim: At 8 weeks, polyhydramnios is not an issue. If you ask, I bet her doctors are concerned that the baby has a cystic hygroma. Crouzon's is an autosomal dominat disorder with variable penetrance, but it would be unusual to 'skip a generation' and cause a new problem, so I doubt this is the cause. Let me know what you find out and I will give you some more thoughts! Dr T
At Tue Jun 03, 07:01:00 PM 2008,
Kenneth F. Trofatter, Jr., MD, PhD said…
To anonymous June 2: Manual cervical checks, unfortunately, are a poor second to ultrasound in assessing what is going on at the level of the internal cervical os. With cervical incompetence, the changes start from the inside (near the baby) and move out. The goal is to pick up those changes BEFORE you can feel the cervix dilating and effacing significantly by manual exam because it is much safer to place a cerclage, if necessary, before that happens. Dr T
At Tue Jun 03, 07:04:00 PM 2008,
Kenneth F. Trofatter, Jr., MD, PhD said…
To Tim: P.S. I just realized, did you mean to say she is 8 MONTHS pregnant? If so, I might have some more thoughts that are worth sharing with you in regard to the Crouzon's. Dr T
At Thu Jun 12, 10:50:00 AM 2008,
Anonymous said…
Dr. T,
I'm the writer with the question about cervix checks. With some effort, I talked them in to a repeat ultrasound that I'll get tomorrow. I feel much better about that approach versus manual. Thank you very much for your advice.
At Fri Jun 13, 01:09:00 PM 2008,
Anonymous said…
Me, again. Happy, happy, joy, joy! My cervix measured an average of 4.2 via transvaginal u/s. She even had my press my belly and it only went to 3.88. I feel so relieved. Thank you for your advice!!!!!!
At Sat Jun 14, 11:02:00 AM 2008,
Kenneth F. Trofatter, Jr., MD, PhD said…
To anonymous June 12/13: That sounds great. Thank you for the kind remarks and let us know how things turn out. Dr T
Post a Comment
<< Home