JUM
HOME HELP FEEDBACK SUBSCRIPTIONS ARCHIVE SEARCH TABLE OF CONTENTS
 QUICK SEARCH:   [advanced]


     


This Article
Right arrow Full Text (PDF)
Right arrow Alert me when this article is cited
Right arrow Alert me if a correction is posted
Services
Right arrow Similar articles in this journal
Right arrow Similar articles in PubMed
Right arrow Alert me to new issues of the journal
Right arrow Download to citation manager
Right arrow reprints & permissions
Citing Articles
Right arrow Citing Articles via HighWire
Right arrow Citing Articles via Google Scholar
Google Scholar
Right arrow Articles by Fatemi, M.
Right arrow Articles by Greenleaf, J. F.
Right arrow Search for Related Content
PubMed
Right arrow PubMed Citation
Right arrow Articles by Fatemi, M.
Right arrow Articles by Greenleaf, J. F.

Journal of Ultrasound in Medicine, Vol 20, Issue 8 883-889, Copyright © 2001 by American Institute of Ultrasound in Medicine


JOURNAL ARTICLE

Fetal stimulation by pulsed diagnostic ultrasound

M. Fatemi, P. L. Ogburn Jr and J. F. Greenleaf
Department of Basic Ultrasound Research, Mayo Clinic and Foundation, Rochester, Minnesota 55905, USA.

OBJECTIVE: To show that pulsed ultrasound from a clinical ultrasonic imaging system can stimulate the fetus. Stimulation is defined mainly as increased fetal gross body movements in response to excitation. METHODS: Fetuses of a group of 9 volunteer women (mean gestational age, 33.37 weeks; range, 25-40 weeks) were evaluated for body movement under 3 different conditions: (1) control, with no ultrasound exposure; (2) ultrasound in continuous wave Doppler mode; and (3) pulsed ultrasound in pulsed Doppler and B modes. A conventional external fetal monitor, with negligible ultrasonic output, was used to monitor fetal gross body motions. After an initial rest period of 3 minutes with 1 or no fetal motion, fetuses were monitored for an additional 3 minutes under the exposure criterion defined for each condition. Resulting fetal motions under the 3 conditions were compared using the Wilcoxon signed rank test. RESULTS: The test showed that fetuses moved significantly more frequently under condition 3 (mean +/- SD, 3.43 +/- 1.93 movements per minute) than under condition 1 (0.40 +/- 7.33 movements per minute) or condition 2 (0.63 +/- 7.67 movements per minute); P = .004 and .016, respectively. Fetal movements under conditions 1 and 2 did not differ significantly. CONCLUSION: Diagnostic ultrasound may stimulate fetal body motion.


This article has been cited by other articles:


Home page
J Ultrasound MedHome page
C. C. Church, E. L. Carstensen, W. L. Nyborg, P. L. Carson, L. A. Frizzell, and M. R. Bailey
The Risk of Exposure to Diagnostic Ultrasound in Postnatal Subjects: Nonthermal Mechanisms
J. Ultrasound Med., April 1, 2008; 27(4): 565 - 592.
[Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]


Home page
J Ultrasound MedHome page
M. E. Stratmeyer, J. F. Greenleaf, D. Dalecki, and K. A. Salvesen
Fetal Ultrasound: Mechanical Effects
J. Ultrasound Med., April 1, 2008; 27(4): 597 - 605.
[Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]


Home page
J Ultrasound MedHome page
D. A. Toms
The Mechanical Index, Ultrasound Practices, and the ALARA Principle
J. Ultrasound Med., April 1, 2006; 25(4): 560 - 561.
[Full Text] [PDF]


Home page
J Ultrasound MedHome page
J. S. Abramowicz and E. Sheiner
Acoustic Output in Obstetric Ultrasound, ALARA and Education
J. Ultrasound Med., April 1, 2006; 25(4): 561 - 562.
[Full Text] [PDF]


Home page
J Ultrasound MedHome page
D. J. Sahn, C. E. Sahn, M. Fatemi, and J. F. Greenleaf
Fetal Stimulation by Ultrasound
J. Ultrasound Med., January 1, 2002; 21(1): 30 - 30.
[Full Text] [PDF]




HOME HELP FEEDBACK SUBSCRIPTIONS ARCHIVE SEARCH TABLE OF CONTENTS
Copyright © 2001 by the American Institute of Ultrasound in Medicine.