Ultrasound markers of adverse pregnancy outcomes in embryonal period: literature review and own clinical cases

A goal of the review was to search and describe all currently known prenatal ultrasound markers of adverse pregnancy outcomes. The review is instantiated by multiple ultrasound images of own clinical cases. Taking into account the authors wide experience, it is possible to use all of presented ultrasound signs as predictors (markers) of an adverse pregnancy outcome in the early stages. From our point of view, it is reasonable to divide the markers into two groups, “primary markers” and “dynamic markers”. In the case of “Primary markers” revealing on initial ultrasound, it is reasonable to perform control ultrasound in 7–10 days to confirm the viable pregnancy or missed miscarriage.  The “Dynamic markers” can be used on control ultrasound, and some of them may be used in shorter dynamic period when there is a need to predict the outcome earlier than 7-10 days. Generally, the review describes 22 early pregnancy ultrasound markers of adverse pregnancy outcome. These are imaging features of the gestational sac, yolk sac, embryo size, embryo heartbeat, and amnion. Early pregnancy ultrasound is not mandatory, but in a real-case scenario, almost all women undergoes ultrasound on early stage of pregnancy in objective or subjective causes. Therefore, in the first days of pregnancy, women should receive a highly professional diagnostic by a physician, able to assess the risks and prognosis of pregnancy outcome. The authors of the review particularly notes that the assessment of ultrasound markers of adverse pregnancy outcomes must be carried out with the strictest adherence to the medical ethics, deontology, and medical privacy.

1. American College of Obstetricians and Gynecologists' Committee on Practice Bulletins—Gynecology. ACOG Practice Bulletin No. 200: Early Pregnancy Loss. Obstet Gynecol. 2018; 132 (5): e197–e207. http://doi.org/10.1097/AOG.0000000000002899. PMID: 30157093.

2. Benson L.S., Holt S.K., Gore J.L., Callegari L.S., Chipman A.K., Kessler L., Dalton V.K. Early Pregnancy Loss Management in the Emergency Department vs Outpatient Setting. JAMA Netw. Open. 2023; 6 (3): e232639. http://doi.org/10.1001/jamanetworkopen.2023.2639

3. Detti L., Francillon L., Christiansen M.E., Peregrin-Alvarez I., Goedecke P.J., Bursac Z., Roman R.A. Early pregnancy ultrasound measurements and prediction of first trimester pregnancy loss: A logistic model. Sci. Rep. 2020; 10 (1): 1545. http://doi.org/10.1038/s41598-020-58114-3. Erratum in: Sci. Rep. 2021; 11 (1): 21598. PMID: 32005925; PMCID: PMC6994659.

4. Jackson T., Watkins E. Early pregnancy loss. JAAPA. 2021; 34 (3): 22–27. http://doi.org/10.1097/01.JAA.0000733216.66078.ac

5. Early pregnancy. From periconceptional preparation to healthy gestation / Eds V.E. Radzinsky, A.A. Orazmuradova. 3rd edition, revised and updated. M.: Editorial staff of StatusPraesens Journal, 2018. 800 p. (In Russian)

6. Clinical guidelines. Miscarriage (spontaneous abortion). Year of approval (revision frequency): 2021. Clinical practice guideline developer – Russian Society of

7. Obstetrician and Gynecologists Approved by the Applied Research Council, Ministry of Health of the Russian Federation. (In Russian)

8. Milovanov A.P., Saveliev V.S. Human embryo-fetal development. M.: MDV, 2006. 382 p. (In Russian)

9. Altynnik N.A. Ultrasound diagnostics in obstetrics and gynaecology: entry level. References. M.: Real Time, 2021. 87 p. (In Russian)

10. Timakina D.N., Bulanov M.N., Murashkin V.V. Ultrasonographic criteria to identify risk group for adverse early pregnancy outcome. XII International (XXI Russian) International Pirogov Scientific Medical Conference for Students and Young Scientists Moscow, 2017. (In Russian)

11. Detti L., Roman R.A., Goedecke P.J., Christiansen M.E., Peregrin-Alvarez I., Ikwuezunma G., Francillon L. Pilot study establishing a nomogram of yolk sac growth during the first trimester of pregnancy. J. Obstet Gynaecol. Res. 2020; 46 (2): 223–228. http://doi.org/10.1111/jog.14173

12. Salvesen K., Abramowicz J., Ter Haar G., Miloro P., Sinkovskaya E., Dall'Asta A., Maršál K., Lees C.; Board of the International Society of Ultrasound in Obstetrics and Gynecology (ISUOG). ISUOG statement on the safe use of Doppler for fetal ultrasound examination in the first 13 + 6 weeks of pregnancy (updated). Ultrasound Obstet. Gynecol. 2021; 57 (6): 1020. http://doi.org/10.1002/uog.23610

13. Alves C., Jenkins S.M., Rapp A. Early Pregnancy Loss (Spontaneous Abortion). 2023. In: StatPearls [Internet]. Treasure Island (FL): StatPearls Publishing; 2023 Jan. PMID: 32809356. Guideline on the management of recurrent pregnancy loss. ESHRE. Issued: 1 February 2023.

14. Sapra K.J., Joseph K.S., Galea S., Bates L.M., Louis G.M., Ananth C.V. Signs and Symptoms of Early Pregnancy Loss. Reprod. Sci. 2017; 24 (4): 502–513. http://doi.org/10.1177/1933719116654994

15. Xiong Y.Q., Tan J., Liu Y.M., He Q., Li L., Zou K., Sun X. The risk of maternal parvovirus B19 infection during pregnancy on fetal loss and fetal hydrops: A systematic review and meta-analysis. J. Clin. Virol. 2019; 114: 12–20. http://doi.org/10.1016/j.jcv.2019.03.004

16. Frazier T., Hogue C.J.R., Bonney E.A., Yount K.M., Pearce B.D. Weathering the storm; a review of pre-pregnancy stress and risk of spontaneous abortion. Psychoneuroendocrinology. 2018; 92: 142–154. http://doi.org/10.1016/j.psyneuen.2018.03.001

17. Neill S. Management of Early Pregnancy Loss. JAMA. 2023; 329 (16): 1399–1400. http://doi.org/10.1001/jama.2023.0933

18. Frates M.C., Doubilet P.M., Durfee S.M., Di Salvo D.N., Laing F.C., Brown D.L., Benson C.B., Hill J.A. Sonographic and Doppler characteristics of the corpus luteum: can they predict pregnancy outcome? J. Ultrasound Med. 2001; 20 (8): 821–827. http://doi.org/10.7863/jum.2001.20.8.821

19. Pomortsev A.V., Dyachenko Yu.Yu., Grushevskaya Yu.V., Lashevich V.V. Prediction of adverse pregnancy outcome for the fetus on the basis of ultrasound investigation of the embryo and extraembryonic structures. Kuban Scientific Medical Bulletin. 2017; 24 (6): 110–115. http://doi.org/10.25207 / 1608-6228-2017-24-6-110-115 (In Russian)

20. Datta M.R., Raut A. Efficacy of first-trimester ultrasound parameters for prediction of early spontaneous abortion. Int. J. Gynaecol. Obstet. 2017; 138: 325–330. http://doi.org/10.1002/ijgo.12231

21. Timakina D.N., Bulanov M.N., Markers of adverse pregnancy outcome in ultrasonography up to 11 weeks of gestation. Ultrasound and Functional Diagnostics. 2018; 1: s21, p. 107. (In Russian)

22. Emelyanenko E.S., Blinov A.Yu., Volkovskaya T.M. “Black box” of non-developing early pregnancy. Prenatal diagnostics. 2017; 16 (2): 151–156. (In Russian)

23. Fernlund A., Jokubkiene L., Sladkevicius P., Valentin L. Predictors of complete miscarriage after expectant management or misoprostol treatment of non-viable early pregnancy in women with vaginal bleeding. Arch. Gynecol. Obstet. 2020; 302 (5): 1279–1296. http://doi.org/10.1007/s00404-020-05672-6

24. Harris R.D., Couto C., Karpovsky C., Porter M.M., Ouhilal S. The chorionic bump: a first-trimester pregnancy sonographic finding associated with a guarded prognosis. J. Ultrasound Med. 2006; 25 (6): 757–763. http://doi.org/10.7863/jum.2006.25.6.757

25. Sana Y., Appiah A., Davison A., Nicolaides K.H., Johns J., Ross J.A. Clinical significance of first-trimester chorionic bumps: a matched case-control study. Ultrasound Obstet. Gynecol. 2013; 42 (5): 585–589. http://doi.org/10.1002/uog.12528

26. Arleo E.K., Troiano R.N. Chorionic bump on first-trimester sonography: not necessarily a poor prognostic indicator for pregnancy. J. Ultrasound Med. 2015; 34 (1): 137–142. http://doi.org/10.7863/ultra.34.1.137

27. Younesi L, Shahnazari R. Chorionic Bump in First-trimester Sonography. J. Med. Ultrasound. 2017; 25 (4): 221–226. http://doi.org/10.1016/j.jmu.2017.04.004

28. Altynnik N.A., Medvedev M.V., Voytyuk E.G. Chorionic bump: analysis of 16 observations and literature review. Prenatal Diagnostics. 2018; 17 (2): 116–121. (In Russian)

29. Yousaf A., Tayyab A., Anil M.S.U., Ahmed M.M.H., Ahmed S.S.H.B.A. Sr, Alobadli A. Chorionic Bump: Radiologic Features and Pregnancy Outcomes. Cureus. 2020; 12 (11): e11480. http://doi.org/10.7759/cureus.11480

30. Wax J.R., Cartin A., Litton C., Pinette M.G., Lucas F.L. First-trimester chorionic bump--Association with fetal aneuploidy in a high-risk population. J. Clin. Ultrasound. 2017; 45 (1): 3–7. http://doi.org/10.1002/jcu.22417

31. Zheleznyak I.S., Ryazanov V.V., Sadykova G.K., Boikov I.V., Glebov S.G., Kuznetsova N.Yu., Latysheva A.Ya., Postanogov R.A. Chorionic bump: ultrasonic predictor of adverse pregnancy outcome. Bulletin of Russian Military Medical Academy. 2023; 42 (3): 303–309. https://doi.org/10.17816/rmmar546120 (In Russian)

32. Suguna B., Sukanya K. Yolk sac size & shape as predictors of first trimester pregnancy outcome: A prospective observational study. J. Gynecol. Obstet. Hum. Reprod. 2019; 48 (3): 159–164. http://doi.org/10.1016/j.jogoh.2018.10.016

33. Tan S., Gülden Tangal N., Kanat-Pektas M., Sirin Özcan A., Levent Keskin H., Akgündüz G., Akif Teber M., Arslan H. Abnormal sonographic appearances of the yolk sac: which can be associated with adverse perinatal outcome? Med. Ultrason. 2014; 16 (1):15–20. http://doi.org/10.11152/mu.2014.2066.161.st1gt2

34. DeVilbiss E.A., Mumford S.L., Sjaarda L.A., Connell M.T., Plowden T.C., Andriessen V.C., Perkins N.J., Hill M.J., Silver R.M., Schisterman E.F. Prediction of pregnancy loss by early first trimester ultrasound characteristics. Am. J. Obstet. Gynecol. 2020; 223 (2): 242.e1-242.e22. http://doi.org/10.1016/j.ajog.2020.02.025

35. Preisler J., Kopeika J., Ismail L., Vathanan V., Farren J., Abdallah Y., Battacharjee P., Van Holsbeke C., Bottomley C., Gould D., Johnson S., Stalder C., Van Calster B., Hamilton J., Timmerman D., Bourne T. Defining safe criteria to diagnose miscarriage: prospective observational multicentre study. BMJ. 2015; 351: h4579. http://doi.org/10.1136/bmj.h4579

36. Yegul N.T., Filly R.A. Further observations on the empty “amnion sign”. J. Clin. Ultrasound. 2010; 38 (3): 113–117. http://doi.org/10.1002/jcu.20673

37. Dooley W.M., De Braud L., Thanatsis N., Memtsa M., Jauniaux E., Jurkovic D. Predictive value of presence of amniotic sac without visible embryonic heartbeat in diagnosis of early embryonic demise. Ultrasound Obstet. Gynecol. 2021; 57 (1): 149–154. http://doi.org/10.1002/uog.23533

38. Yegul N.T., Filly R.A. The expanded amnion sign: evidence of early embryonic death. J. Ultrasound Med. 2009; 28 (10): 1331–1335. http://doi.org/10.7863/jum.2009.28.10.1331

39. Wax J.R., Pinette M.G., Filly R.A. The expanded amnion sign: evidence of early embryonic death. J. Ultrasound Med. 2010; 29 (2): 323–324; author reply 323-4. PMID: 20103808

40. Pillai R.N., Konje J.C., Richardson M., Tincello D.G., Potdar N. Prediction of miscarriage in women with viable intrauterine pregnancy – A systematic review and diagnostic accuracy meta-analysis. Eur. J. Obstet. Gynecol. Reprod. Biol. 2018; 220: 122–131. http://doi.org/10.1016/j.ejogrb.2017.10.024

41. Bromley B.H.B., Laboda L.A., Benacerraf B.R. Small sac size in the first trimester: A predictor of poor fetal outcome. Radiology. 1991; 178 (2): 375–377. http://doi.org/10.1148/radiology.178.2.1987595

42. Kapfhamer J.D., Palaniappan S., Summers K., Kassel K., Mancuso A.C., Ryan G.L., Shah D.K. Difference between mean gestational sac diameter and crown-rump length as a marker of first-trimester pregnancy loss after in vitro fertilization. Fertil. Steril. 2018; 109 (1): 130–136. http://doi.org/10.1016/j.fertnstert.2017.09.031

43. Abdallah Y., Daemen A., Kirk E., Pexsters A., Naji O., Stalder C., Gould D., Ahmed S., Guha S., Syed S., Bottomley C., Timmerman D., Bourne T. Limitations of current definitions of miscarriage using mean gestational sac diameter and crown-rump length measurements: a multicenter observational study. Ultrasound Obstet. Gynecol. 2011; 38 (5): 497–502. http://doi.org/10.1002/uog.10109

44. Doubilet P.M., Benson C.B., Bourne T., Blaivas M.; Society of Radiologists in Ultrasound Multispecialty Panel on Early First Trimester Diagnosis of Miscarriage and Exclusion of a Viable Intrauterine Pregnancy; Barnhart K.T., Benacerraf B.R., Brown D.L., Filly R.A., Fox J.C., Goldstein S.R., Kendall J.L., Lyons E.A., Porter M.B., Pretorius D.H., Timor-Tritsch I.E. Diagnostic criteria for nonviable pregnancy early in the first trimester. N. Engl. J. Med. 2013; 369 (15): 1443–1451. http://doi.org/10.1056/NEJMra1302417. PMID: 24106937

45. Laboda L.A., Estroff J.A., Benacerraf B.R. First trimester bradycardia. A sign of impending fetal loss. J. Ultrasound Med. 1989; 8 (10): 561–563. http://doi.org/10.7863/jum.1989.8.10.561

46. Doubilet P.M., Benson C.B. Embryonic heart rate in the early first trimester: what rate is normal? J. Ultrasound Med. 1995; 14 (6): 431–434. http://doi.org/10.7863/jum.1995.14.6.431

47. Timakina D.N., Bulanov M.N., Efremov V.A. Possibility of early prenatal loss prediction based on assessment of embryo heart function in different gestation terms. Ultrasound and Functional Diagnostics. 2018; 3: s41

48. Timakina D.N., Bulanov M.N., Efremov V.A. Study of embryo heart rate with calculation of threshold for high risk of early prenatal losses without taking into account of exact gestation term. Ultrasound and Functional Diagnostics. 2018; 3: s42. (In Russian)

49. Taylor T.J., Quinton A.E., de Vries B.S., Hyett J.A. First-trimester ultrasound features associated with subsequent miscarriage: A prospective study. Aust. N. Z. J. Obstet Gynaecol. 2019; 59 (5): 641–648. http://doi.org/10.1111/ajo.12944

50. Sakamoto A., Kamada Y., Kubo K., Hasegawa T., Kotani S., Nakatsuka M., Hiramatsu Y. Slow Fetal Heart Rate before Miscarriage in the Early First Trimester Predicts Fetal Aneuploidy in Women with Recurrent Pregnancy Loss. Acta Med. Okayama. 2018; 72 (1): 61–66. http://doi.org/10.18926/AMO/55664

51. Filly M.R., Callen P.W., Yegul N.T., Filly R.A. The yolk stalk sign: evidence of death in small embryos without heartbeats. J. Ultrasound Med. 2010; 29 (2): 237–241. http://doi.org/10.7863/jum.2010.29.2.237

52. Acuña J., Rukh S., Adhikari S. Point-of-care ultrasound identification of yolk stalk sign in a case of failed first trimester pregnancy. Wld J. Emerg. Med. 2018; 9 (2): 149–151. http://doi.org/10.5847/wjem.j.1920-8642.2018.02.012

53. Yi Y., Lu G., Ouyang Y., lin G., Gong F., Li X. A logistic model to predict early pregnancy loss following in vitro fertilization based on 2601 infertility patients. Reprod. Biol. Endocrinol. 2016; 14:15. http://doi.org/10.1186/s12958-016-0147-z

54. Order of the Ministry of Health of the Russian Federation No. 1130n dated 20.10.2020 “On approval of the procedure of health care delivery in obstetrics and gynaecology”. 2020. 615 p. (In Russian)