Doppler Evaluation of Fetal Cardiac Function in Gestational Diabetes Mellitus: A Scoping Review Providing Insights into Hemodynamic and Structural Alterations
Abstract
1. Introduction
Objective
2. Methodology
2.1. Search Strategy
2.2. Research Question and Eligibility Criteria
- P (Population): Fetuses of pregnant women diagnosed with gestational diabetes mellitus (GDM).
- I (Intervention/Exposure): Doppler-based fetal echocardiographic techniques.
- C (Comparator): Fetuses of pregnant women with normoglycemic pregnancies (non-diabetic controls) or within-group comparisons (well vs. poorly controlled GDM).
- O (Outcomes): Alterations in fetal cardiac structure and function, such as the myocardial performance index (MPI), E/A and E′/A′ ratios, cardiac output, ventricular wall thickness, global longitudinal strain (GLS), diastolic/systolic dysfunction indices, and predictive value for adverse perinatal outcomes.
2.3. Inclusion Criteria
- Use of Doppler ultrasound (spectral, tissue, or advanced techniques) for assessment of fetal cardiac function or structure;
- Original research articles, including randomized controlled trials, prospective or retrospective cohort, and case-control studies;
- Availability of full-text articles published in English.
2.4. Exclusion Criteria
- Studies involving only non-GDM populations;
- Animal or in vitro studies;
- Secondary literature (reviews, editorials, commentaries);
- Conference papers and abstracts;
- Articles lacking full-text access or methodological transparency.
2.5. Screening Process
2.6. Data Extraction Process
3. Results
3.1. Conventional Pulsed-Wave Doppler
3.2. Modified and Automated MPI
3.3. Tissue Doppler Imaging (TDI)
3.4. Speckle-Tracking Echocardiography (STE)
3.5. Dual-Gate Doppler
3.6. Aortic Isthmus Doppler
3.7. Color Doppler and M-Mode
4. Discussion
4.1. Doppler Echocardiography—Traditional/Conventional Approach
4.2. Automated Right Ventricular MPI for Functional Assessment in Diabetic Pregnancies
4.3. Pulsed Tissue Doppler Imaging (TDI)
4.4. Doppler-Based Hemodynamic Assessment in GDM
4.5. Dual-Gate Doppler (DD)
4.6. Aortic Isthmus Doppler as an Uprising Marker of Fetal Cardiac Adaptation in GDM
4.7. Integrated Doppler and Speckle-Tracking Assessment of Perinatal Cardiac Function in Diabetic Pregnancy
4.8. Strategy for Optimal Timing and Technique Selection in Fetal Cardiac Assessment of GDM Pregnancies
4.9. Limitations
4.10. Future Directions
5. Conclusions
Supplementary Materials
Author Contributions
Funding
Institutional Review Board Statement
Informed Consent Statement
Conflicts of Interest
References
- Choudhury, A.A.; Devi Rajeswari, V. Gestational diabetes mellitus—A metabolic and reproductive disorder. Biomed. Pharmacother. 2021, 143, 112183. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Panaitescu, A. Gestational Diabetes. Obstetrical Perspective. Acta Endocrinol. 2016, 12, 331–334. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Ta, S. Diagnosis and Classification of Diabetes Mellitus. Diabetes Care 2014, 37 (Suppl. S1), S81–S90. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Mao, Y.; Hu, W.; Xia, B.; Liu, L.; Han, X.; Liu, Q. Association Between Gestational Diabetes Mellitus and the Risks of Type-Specific Cardiovascular Diseases. Front. Public Health 2022, 10, 940335. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Lee, S.M.; Shivakumar, M.; Park, J.W.; Jung, Y.M.; Choe, E.K.; Kwak, S.H.; Oh, S.; Park, J.S.; Jun, J.K.; Kim, D.; et al. Long-term cardiovascular outcomes of gestational diabetes mellitus: A prospective UK Biobank study. Cardiovasc. Diabetol. 2022, 21, 221. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Kramer, C.K.; Campbell, S.; Retnakaran, R. Gestational diabetes and the risk of cardiovascular disease in women: A systematic review and meta-analysis. Diabetologia 2019, 62, 905–914. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
- Yu, Y.; Soohoo, M.; Sørensen, H.T.; Li, J.; Arah, O.A. Gestational Diabetes Mellitus and the Risks of Overall and Type-Specific Cardiovascular Diseases: A Population- and Sibling-Matched Cohort Study. Diabetes Care 2022, 45, 151–159. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
- Basu, M.; Garg, V. Maternal hyperglycemia and fetal cardiac development: Clinical impact and underlying mechanisms. Birth Defects Res. 2018, 110, 1504–1516. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Rodolaki, K.; Pergialiotis, V.; Iakovidou, N.; Boutsikou, T.; Iliodromiti, Z.; Kanaka-Gantenbein, C. The impact of maternal diabetes on the future health and neurodevelopment of the offspring: A review of the evidence. Front. Endocrinol. 2023, 14, 1125628. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Alnuaimi, S.A.; Jimaa, S.; Khandoker, A.H. Fetal Cardiac Doppler Signal Processing Techniques: Challenges and Future Research Directions. Front. Bioeng. Biotechnol. 2017, 5, 82. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Tutschek, B.; Schmidt, K. Sonographic Assessment of Fetal Cardiac Function: Indirect Measurements of Fetal Cardiac Function, Newer Techniques and Clinical Applications. Ultraschall Med. Eur. J. Ultrasound 2011, 33, E16–E24. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Tsokkou, S.; Konstantinidis, I.; Anastasiou, V.; Matsas, A.; Stamoula, E.; Peteinidou, E.; Sioga, A.; Papamitsou, T.; Ziakas, A.; Kamperidis, V. Fetal Supraventricular Tachycardia: What Do We Know up to This Day? J. Pers. Med. 2025, 15, 341. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Bogo, M.A.; Pabis, J.S.; Bonchoski, A.B.; Santos, D.C.D.; Pinto, T.J.; Simões, M.A.; Silva, J.C.; Pabis, F.C. Cardiomyopathy and cardiac function in fetuses and newborns of diabetic mothers. J. Pediatr. 2021, 97, 520–524. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
- Bhorat, I.E.; Bagratee, J.S.; Pillay, M.; Reddy, T. Use of the myocardial performance index as a prognostic indicator of adverse fetal outcome in poorly controlled gestational diabetic pregnancies. Prenat. Diagn. 2014, 34, 1301–1306. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
- Pooransari, P.; Mehrabi, S.; Mirzamoradi, M.; Salehgargari, S.; Afrakhteh, M. Comparison of Parameters of Fetal Doppler Echocardiography Between Mothers with and Without Diabetes. Int. J. Endocrinol. Metab. 2022, 20, e117524. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
- Ding, Z.J.; Yue, J.Z.; Zhang, Y.D.; Yin, W. Research on evaluation of fetal right ventricular function in normal and diabetic pregnant women during mid to late pregnancy using automated MPI ultrasound detection technology. J. Matern. Fetal Neonatal Med. 2024, 37, 2424892. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Hatém, M.A.; Zielinsky, P.; Hatém, D.M.; Nicoloso, L.H.; Manica, J.L.; Piccoli Jr, A.L.; Zanettini, J.; Oliveira, V.; Scarpa, F.; Petracco, R. Assessment of diastolic ventricular function in fetuses of diabetic mothers using tissue Doppler. Cardiol. Young 2008, 18, 297–302. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Moghadam, M.K.; Hemmatian, M.N.; Mirmohammadkhani, M.; Rahmanian, M. Evaluation of Ventricular Dyssynchrony Measured by Tissue Doppler Indices in Fetuses of Diabetic Mothers: A Case-Control Study. J. Tehran Univ. Heart Cent. 2024, 19, 276–282. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Pathan, F.; Lam, P.; Sivapathan, S.; Pathan, S.; Gao, Z.; Orde, S.; Nirthanakumaran, D.; Negishi, K.; Nanan, R. Impact of maternal diabetes mellitus on fetal atrial strain. Int. J. Cardiovasc. Imaging 2024, 40, 1987–1994. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Patey, O.; Carvalho, J.S.; Thilaganathan, B. Perinatal changes in fetal cardiac geometry and function in diabetic pregnancy at term. Ultrasound Obstet. Gynecol. 2019, 54, 634–642. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Miranda, J.O.; Cerqueira, R.J.; Ramalho, C.; Areias, J.C.; Henriques-Coelho, T. Fetal Cardiac Function in Maternal Diabetes: A Conventional and Speckle-Tracking Echocardiographic Study. J. Am. Soc. Echocardiogr. 2018, 31, 333–341. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Hou, Q.; Yan, F.; Dong, X.; Liu, H.; Wu, J.; Li, J.; Ding, Y. Assessment of fetal cardiac diastolic function of gestational diabetes mellitus using dual-gate Doppler. Medicine 2021, 100, E26645. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
- Chen, X.; Zhang, L.; Lu, J.; Shen, L. Assessing Fetal Circulatory Changes in Gestational Diabetes via Aortic Isthmus Doppler. Clin. Exp. Obstet. Gynecol. 2024, 51, 193. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Cai, D.; Yan, S. Ultrasonographic diagnosis of fetal hemodynamic parameters in pregnant women with diabetes mellitus in the third trimester of pregnancy. Heliyon 2024, 10, e30352. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Simsek, A. Modified Myocardial Performance Index in Fetal Growth Disturbances as Diagnostic and Prognostic Adjunct. Anatol. J. Cardiol. 2023, 27, 34–40. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Maheshwari, P.; Henry, A.; Welsh, A.W. The Fetal Modified Myocardial Performance Index: Is Automation the Future? Biomed. Res. Int. 2015, 2015, 215910. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
- Hernandez-Andrade, E.; Figueroa-Diesel, H.; Kottman, C.; Illanes, S.; Arraztoa, J.; Acosta-Rojas, R.; Gratacos, E. Gestational-age-adjusted reference values for the modified myocardial performance index for evaluation of fetal left cardiac function. Ultrasound Obstet. Gynecol. 2007, 29, 321–325. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Paladini, D.; Lamberti, A.; Teodoro, A.; Arienzo, M.; Tartaglione, A.; Martinelli, P. Tissue Doppler imaging of the fetal heart. Ultrasound Obstet. Gynecol. 2000, 16, 530–535. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Moon-Grady, A.J.; Donofrio, M.T.; Gelehrter, S.; Hornberger, L.; Kreeger, J.; Lee, W.; Michelfelder, E.; Morris, S.A.; Peyvandi, S.; Pinto, N.M.; et al. Guidelines and Recommendations for Performance of the Fetal Echocardiogram: An Update from the American Society of Echocardiography. J. Am. Soc. Echocardiogr. 2023, 36, 679–723. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Wacker-Gussmann, A.; Strasburger, J.; Cuneo, B.; Wakai, R. Diagnosis and Treatment of Fetal Arrhythmia. Am. J. Perinatol. 2014, 31, 617–628. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Tricco, A.C.; Lillie, E.; Zarin, W.; O’Brien, K.K.; Colquhoun, H.; Levac, D.; Moher, D.; Peters, M.D.; Horsley, T.; Weeks, L.; et al. PRISMA Extension for Scoping Reviews (PRISMAScR): Checklist and Explanation. Ann Intern Med. 2018, 169, 467–473. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
Search Strategy and Terms Used in PubMed, Scopus, and ScienceDirect |
---|
((“fetal” [All Fields] OR “fetally” [All Fields] OR “fetals” [All Fields] OR “fetus” [MeSH Terms] OR “fetus” [All Fields] OR “fetal” [All Fields] OR “fetal” [All Fields]) AND (“doppler” [All Fields] OR “doppler s” [All Fields] OR “dopplers” [All Fields]) AND (“diabetes, gestational” [MeSH Terms] OR (“diabetes” [All Fields] AND “gestational” [All Fields]) OR “gestational diabetes” [All Fields] OR (“gestational” [All Fields] AND “diabetes” [All Fields] AND “mellitus” [All Fields]) OR “gestational diabetes mellitus” [All Fields]) AND (“fetal heart” [All Fields] OR “fetal heart” [MeSH Terms] OR (“fetal” [All Fields] AND “heart” [All Fields]) OR “fetal heart” [All Fields])) AND (case reports [Filter] OR clinical study [Filter] OR clinical trial [Filter] OR clinical trial phase i [Filter] OR clinical trial phase ii [Filter] OR clinical trial phase iii [Filter] OR comparative study [Filter] OR controlled clinical trial [Filter] OR multicenter study [Filter] OR observational study [Filter] OR randomized controlled trial [Filter]) |
Authors | Year | Study Design | Population | GDM Diagnostic Criteria | Gestational Age (GA) | Doppler Technique | Parameters Measured | Key Findings |
---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
Bogo et al. | 2021 | Prospective descriptive observational study | 48 fetuses and newborns of insulin-treated GDM mothers; singleton pregnancies; no malformations | ADA: FPG ≥ 92 mg/dL, 1 h >180 mg/dL, 2 h ≥ 153 mg/dL | Fetal exams: 22–37 weeks Neonatal: first 2 months | Doppler and M-mode (Philips EnVisor C, S4 probe, 2–4.2 MHz) | Myocardial thickness, LV and RV myocardial performance index (MPI), Shortening fraction, mitral and tricuspid valve E/A ratios | Hypertrophic cardiomyopathy (HPCM): 29% fetal vs. 6% postnatal (p = 0.006), RVMPI altered: 12.5% vs. 54.2% (p < 0.001), LVMPI altered: 27.1% vs. 60.4% (p = 0.001), Mitral E/A altered: 6.3% vs. 50% (p < 0.001), Tricuspid E/A altered: 0% vs. 27.1% (p < 0.001) |
Bhorat et al. | 2014 | Prospective cross-sectional study | 29 women with poorly controlled GDM on insulin (3rd trimester), matched with 29 normal pregnancies (controls); singleton, no anomalies | Not explicitly stated; all were insulin-requiring with poor glycemic control | Assessment: mean GA = 35 weeks Delivery: approximately 38.4 weeks in GDM group | Doppler echocardiography using Mod-MPI and E/A ratios via GE Voluson E8 or Siemens Antares systems | Modified myocardial performance index (Mod-MPI), E/A ratio (mitral valve), ICT, IRT, ET, placental resistance markers (UA RI, MCA RI, DV PI) | Mod-MPI significantly increased in GDM fetuses: 0.59 vs. 0.38, p < 0.0001 E/A ratio lower: 0.65 vs. 0.76, Adverse outcomes in 17/29 GDM fetuses: NICU admission, tachypnea, acidosis, cardiomyopathy, stillbirths, Mod-MPI ≥ 0.52: Sensitivity 100%, specificity 92% for predicting adverse outcomes, no adverse outcomes in control group, Doppler cardiac data not used in management; CTG and UA Doppler alone missed critical compromise |
Pooransari et al. | 2022 | Observational case-control study | 100 singleton pregnancies: 50 diabetic (40 GDM, 10 overt DM) and 50 controls; 22 with poor glycemic control | GDM diagnosed using FBS ≥ 92 mg/dL or OGTT ≥ 153 mg/dL | 2nd–3rd trimester (18–40 weeks); median: 22 weeks | Fetal echocardiography with pulsed Doppler and structural imaging on GE Vivid E8 | Left MPI, isovolumic relaxation time (IVRT), E/A ratios (mitral, tricuspid), LVWT, RVWT, IVST | Higher left MPI in diabetics: 0.53 ± 0.15 vs. 0.43 ± 0.09 (p < 0.05), IVRT > 41 ms more frequent in diabetics, LVWT, RVWT, and IVST significantly greater in diabetic group (p < 0.05), structural abnormalities (e.g., IVST > 4 mm, LVWT > 4.9 mm) occurred only in diabetic group, MPI elevated even in diabetics with good glycemic control, MPI and RVWT were strong predictors of adverse fetal outcomes using decision tree models |
Ding et al. | 2024 | Prospective observational study | 102 pregnant women (85 healthy, 17 with diabetes); singleton, no anomalies | Not explicitly stated; clinically diagnosed DM | 20–38 weeks (mid-to-late pregnancy) | Automated myocardial performance index (AM+MPI) using Samsung WS80A ultrasound (RV inflow/outflow Doppler) | Right ventricular MPI, isovolumic contraction time (ICT), isovolumic relaxation time (IRT), ejection time (ET) | RV MPI significantly higher in diabetic fetuses: 0.54 ± 0.05 vs. 0.48 ± 0.09 (p < 0.05), IRT positively correlated with gestational age (IRT = 29.78 + 0.49 × GA; p < 0.05), no significant variability in MPI, ET, or ICT with GA, IRT showed linear increase with GA, AM+MPI provides a stable, efficient, and reproducible method for assessing fetal RV function, findings support its potential for early detection of functional abnormalities in diabetic pregnancies |
Hatém et al. | 2008 | Cross-sectional observational study | 62 fetuses total: 47 from diabetic mothers (13 with, 34 without myocardial hypertrophy), 15 controls from non-diabetic mothers | ADA, WHO, and Brazilian Diabetes Society guidelines used; details not fully specified | 25 weeks to term (mean 32 weeks) | Tissue Doppler imaging (Siemens Aspen, Philips HP Sonos 5500, GE Vivid III) across mitral, septal, and tricuspid annuli | E′, A′, and S′ velocities at mural/anterior mitral annulus and tricuspid annulus, E/A and E/E′ ratios, conventional mitral/tricuspid inflow velocities | E′ and A′ velocities significantly higher in diabetic fetuses vs. controls (p < 0.05), lower E/E′ ratios in diabetic fetuses at both valves despite normal inflow E/A ratios, diastolic dysfunction evident independently of myocardial hypertrophy, differences in velocity patterns based on annular location (septal < mural < lateral),tissue Doppler revealed abnormalities missed by conventional inflow Doppler, findings suggest TDI detects early diastolic dysfunction—even before structural hypertrophy develops |
Moghadam et al. | 2024 | Case-control study | 26 women with overt diabetes (pre-gestational) vs. 26 healthy controls; singleton pregnancies | Overt DM diagnosed pre-pregnancy or early gestation | Fetal exams at 18–22 weeks and 28 weeks; neonatal assessment at 1 week postnatal | Tissue Doppler echocardiography (Philips Affiniti 50 with C6-2 MHz and S8-3 MHz probes) | Em, Am, Em/Am, LVMPI, IVMDI; dyssynchrony; neonatal outcomes (birthweight, Apgar, hospitalization, echo) | Significantly higher Em (p = 0.007), Am (p < 0.001), LVMPI (p = 0.003), IVMDI (p = 0.026) in diabetic group, no difference in Em/Am ratio (p = 0.264), dyssynchrony present in 30.8% of diabetic fetuses vs. 0% in controls (p = 0.004), adverse neonatal outcomes more frequent in diabetic group (46.2% vs. 7.7%; RR: 8.8, p = 0.009), only LVMPI (p = 0.034) and IVMDI (p < 0.001) were predictive of neonatal complications, IVMDI ≥ 6.5 ms: 67% sensitivity, 100% specificity (RR: 24.5), LVMPI ≥ 0.44: 75% sensitivity, 79% specificity (RR: 11), dyssynchrony and worse outcomes only observed in diabetic subgroup with poor glycemic control |
Cai et al. | 2024 | Observational case-control study | 110 third-trimester women (55 GDM, 55 controls); singleton pregnancies, no chromosomal abnormalities or malformations | FBG ≥ 5.6–5.8 mmol/L or OGTT thresholds exceeded: 1 h ≥ 10.3, 2 h ≥ 8.6, 3 h ≥ 6.7 mmol/L (Chinese clinical thresholds) | Third trimester; ~36.8 weeks average | Color Doppler ultrasound using Hitachi HI VISION Avius and GE Voluson 730ProV (3–5 MHz probe) | RI, PI, S/D of MCA, UA, and RA, cardiac parameters: MVA, TVA, AVA, PVA, LVDd, LVDs, RVDd, RVDs, LVWT, RVWT, LVEF, LVFS, RVFS, maternal serum Cys C and Hcy levels, neonatal outcomes: Apgar, NICU admission, macrosomia, hypoxia-related conditions | MCA RI, PI, S/D decreased; UA and RA RI, PI, S/D increased in GDM fetuses (all p < 0.05), cardiac structures (MVA, TVA, AVA, PVA) and LV/RV wall thicknesses significantly larger in GDM group, higher LVEF, LVFS, RVFS in GDM group, Cys C: 1.35 mg/L vs. 0.69 mg/L; Hcy: 19.88 vs. 10.17 μmol/L, adverse pregnancy outcomes (APO) rate: 25.45% in GDM vs. 10.91% in controls, ROC: AUCs for MCA S/D = 0.875, UA RI = 0.863, RA S/D = 0.850; Cys C = 0.753, logistic regression confirmed significant associations between these markers and APO risk (p < 0.05) |
Hou et al. | 2021 | Prospective cross-sectional study | 111 singleton pregnancies (56 GDM, 55 controls); 24–30 weeks gestation; matched GA; excluded fetal/maternal conditions | IADPSG criteria: OGTT ≥ 5.1 (0 h), ≥10.0 (1 h), ≥8.5 mmol/L (2 h); per Chinese GDM guidelines | 24–30 weeks GA | Dual-gate Doppler (DD) + conventional pulsed Doppler and tissue Doppler imaging (TDI) (ALOKA F75 system) | E/A ratio, e′/a′ ratio, E/e′ ratio (mitral and tricuspid), Peak E, A, e′, a′ velocities using both methods | E/e′ ratios significantly lower in GDM group for both LV and RV using DD method (p = 0.036 for LV, p = 0.01 for RV), RV E/e′ also significantly reduced using conventional Doppler (p = 0.001), RV showed greater sensitivity to dysfunction than LV, tricuspid e′ velocity increased in GDM group (p = 0.037), suggesting adaptation to reduced compliance, no significant differences in E/A or e′/a′ ratios between groups, well vs. poorly controlled GDM: no significant differences in DD measures suggesting that even well-controlled hyperglycemia affects fetal diastolic function, DD method shown to be feasible, reproducible, and more sensitive than conventional Doppler |
Chen et al. | 2024 | Cross-sectional observational study | 94 singleton pregnancies: 47 with GDM, 47 healthy controls (matched for GA and age) | OGTT (24–28 weeks): FPG ≥ 5.1 mmol/L, 1 h ≥ 10.0 mmol/L, 2 h ≥ 8.5 mmol/L | Mean GA: 32.8 weeks | Color Doppler of aortic isthmus (GE Voluson E8/S10, 1–5 MHz probe) | Systolic and diastolic flow velocity time integrals (S, D), peak systolic velocity (PSV), systolic nadir (Ns), IFI = (S+D)/S, ISI = Ns/PSV | D, Ns, IFI, and ISI were significantly lower in GDM group (e.g., D: 2.39 cm vs. 2.76 cm, p = 0.015; IFI: 1.24 vs. 1.27, p = 0.042), no significant differences in umbilical artery Doppler (PSV, EDV, PI, S/D), IFI and ISI declined with gestational age in GDM fetuses, especially ISI showing a linear downward trend, suggests earlier hemodynamic changes in aortic arch circulation than in umbilical artery, combining IFI and ISI may improve prenatal assessment of fetal circulatory impairment in GDM |
Miranda et al. | 2017 | Cross-sectional observational study | 129 fetuses: 76 exposed to maternal diabetes (69 GDM, 7 pregestational); 53 controls with normal fetal hearts | International criteria: FPG or 75g OGTT between 24–28 weeks (details not fully specified) | 30–33 weeks | Conventional echocardiography + 2D speckle-tracking echocardiography (Vivid E95 system, GE Healthcare) | IVS thickness, cardiac output (CO), shortening fraction (SF), MAPSE/TAPSE, mitral/tricuspid E/A ratio, modified MPI, LV/RV global longitudinal strain (GLS), early and late diastolic strain rates (SRe, SRa), segmental and global deformation rates | IVS significantly thicker in maternal diabetes (MD) group (p < 0.001), lower LV cardiac output in MD fetuses (p < 0.05), no significant differences in conventional diastolic/systolic function markers, lower SRe and SRa in both ventricles, indicating diastolic dysfunction (p < 0.05), RV GLS significantly lower in MD fetuses: −13.67% vs. −15.52% (p < 0.05), diastolic dysfunction occurred independently of septal hypertrophy, speckle-tracking detected subclinical biventricular dysfunction missed by conventional methods, maternal age independently predicted worse GLS in MD group, non-medicated GDM subgroup had more impaired function than insulin/metformin-treated group |
Pathan et al. | 2024 | Prospective observational study | 151 singleton pregnancies: 104 with maternal diabetes (GDM, T1DM, T2DM), 47 healthy controls; matched for maternal age and GA | ADIPS criteria: OGTT with FPG ≥ 5.1 mmol/L, 1 h ≥ 10.0 mmol/L, 2 h ≥ 8.5 mmol/L (Australia) | Mean approximately 28.6 weeks | Speckle-tracking echocardiography (GE Voluson, RAB6-RS probe; TomTec Image Arena software) | Left atrial strain (LAS), right atrial strain (RAS), left atrial area (LAA), right atrial area (RAA), septal thickness (IVS), LV GLS and RV free wall strain (RV FWS) | LAS significantly reduced in DM group: 28.8 ± 8.8% vs. 33.3 ± 10.4% (p = 0.007); DM independently predicted reduced LAS after multivariable adjustment, RAS also reduced: 27.7 ± 10.4% vs. 31.8 ± 10.3% (p = 0.02); RV FWS and fetal weight were main determinants, IVS significantly thicker in DM group (p = 0.001), no significant difference in LV GLS or birthweight. Suggests subclinical atrial dysfunction occurs in diabetic fetuses even when conventional markers appear normal |
Patey et al. | 2019 | Prospective longitudinal study | 75 term pregnancies (54 normal; 21 diabetic: 14 GDM on metformin, 7 PGDM on insulin); singleton, no anomalies | UK NICE guidelines for diabetes in pregnancy; all had appropriate glycemic control | Term (around 38–40 weeks) | B-mode, M-mode, PW Doppler, tissue Doppler imaging (TDI), and speckle-tracking imaging (STI) using GE Vivid E9 (fetal and neonatal exams) | Cardiac geometry: chamber dimensions, sphericity index, wall thickness, myocardial performance indices (LV-MPI’, RV-MPI’), diastolic function: E′/A′, E/E′ ratios, IVRT’, systolic function: CO, S′ velocities, IVCT’, LV torsion, myocardial deformation: longitudinal, circumferential, radial strain and strain rate, left ventricular twist/torsion across fetal and neonatal stages | Diabetic fetuses showed increased RV sphericity index, thicker IVS and ventricular walls, reduced LV dimensions, and lower LV CO, elevated myocardial strain (e.g., basal circumferential/radial) in fetuses, decreased longitudinal strain rates postnatally, postnatal persistence of altered cardiac geometry and dysfunction, especially LV torsion, IVRT′, MPI′ and E′/A′ ratios, tricuspid regurgitation more common in diabetic neonates (48% vs. 6%), fetal/neonatal changes likely reflect adaptive response to fetal hypoxemia, metabolic derangement and altered loading conditions at delivery |
Feature | Myocardial Performance Index (MPI) | Modified Myocardial Performance Index (Mod-MPI) |
---|---|---|
Definition | A Doppler-derived index assessing global cardiac function via systolic and diastolic time intervals | A refined version of MPI using valve clicks for more precise time interval measurement |
Formula | (ICT + IRT)/ET | Same formula: (ICT + IRT)/ET |
Landmark Identification | Based on waveform morphology (e.g., mitral inflow and aortic outflow) | Based on valve opening and closing clicks (mitral and aortic valves) |
Reproducibility | Moderate; operator-dependent | Higher reproducibility due to clearer anatomical landmarks |
Clinical Use | Used in both adult and fetal cardiology | Primarily used in fetal echocardiography |
Sensitivity to Dysfunction | Good for detecting global dysfunction | More sensitive to subtle or early-stage fetal cardiac dysfunction |
Preferred In | General cardiac assessments | High-risk pregnancies (e.g., GDM, IUGR) where standardization and precision are critical |
Gestational Weeks | Diagnostic Tool | Assessment | Rationale—Reference |
---|---|---|---|
Mid-trimester screening (24–28 weeks’ gestation) | Conventional pulsed-wave Doppler | Measure E/A ratios, isovolumic contraction time (ICT), isovolumic relaxation time (IRT) and myocardial performance index (MPI). | Bhorat et al., 2014 [14] and Pooransari et al., 2022 [15] demonstrated that diastolic dysfunction often appears by 24–28 weeks, even before septal hypertrophy is evident. |
Early third-trimester follow-up (28–32 weeks’ gestation) | Tissue Doppler imaging | Assess E′/A′ and E/E′ ratios and interventricular mechanical delay index (IVMDI). | Hatém et al., 2008 [17] and Moghadam et al., 2024 [18] showed that TDI at this stage reliably unearths early diastolic impairment and dyssynchrony. |
Advanced deformation analysis (30–34 weeks’ gestation) | Speckle-tracking echocardiography (STE) | Quantify global longitudinal strain (GLS), atrial strain, and diastolic strain rates. | Miranda et al., 2018 [21] and Pathan et al., 2024 [19] found that STE is most sensitive for detecting subclinical systolic and diastolic dysfunction when applied in the early third trimester. |
Supplementary modalities (any time after 20 weeks where available) | Dual-gate Doppler for simultaneous E/e′ ratio measurement to minimize beat-to-beat variability | ||
Automated MPI for operator-independent, efficient assessment of right ventricular function from mid-trimester onward. |
Disclaimer/Publisher’s Note: The statements, opinions and data contained in all publications are solely those of the individual author(s) and contributor(s) and not of MDPI and/or the editor(s). MDPI and/or the editor(s) disclaim responsibility for any injury to people or property resulting from any ideas, methods, instructions or products referred to in the content. |
© 2025 by the authors. Licensee MDPI, Basel, Switzerland. This article is an open access article distributed under the terms and conditions of the Creative Commons Attribution (CC BY) license (https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/).
Share and Cite
Tsokkou, S.; Konstantinidis, I.; Matsas, A.; Karopoulou, E.; Papamitsou, T. Doppler Evaluation of Fetal Cardiac Function in Gestational Diabetes Mellitus: A Scoping Review Providing Insights into Hemodynamic and Structural Alterations. J. Clin. Med. 2025, 14, 5622. https://doi.org/10.3390/jcm14165622
Tsokkou S, Konstantinidis I, Matsas A, Karopoulou E, Papamitsou T. Doppler Evaluation of Fetal Cardiac Function in Gestational Diabetes Mellitus: A Scoping Review Providing Insights into Hemodynamic and Structural Alterations. Journal of Clinical Medicine. 2025; 14(16):5622. https://doi.org/10.3390/jcm14165622
Chicago/Turabian StyleTsokkou, Sophia, Ioannis Konstantinidis, Alkis Matsas, Evaggelia Karopoulou, and Theodora Papamitsou. 2025. "Doppler Evaluation of Fetal Cardiac Function in Gestational Diabetes Mellitus: A Scoping Review Providing Insights into Hemodynamic and Structural Alterations" Journal of Clinical Medicine 14, no. 16: 5622. https://doi.org/10.3390/jcm14165622
APA StyleTsokkou, S., Konstantinidis, I., Matsas, A., Karopoulou, E., & Papamitsou, T. (2025). Doppler Evaluation of Fetal Cardiac Function in Gestational Diabetes Mellitus: A Scoping Review Providing Insights into Hemodynamic and Structural Alterations. Journal of Clinical Medicine, 14(16), 5622. https://doi.org/10.3390/jcm14165622