Journal Mobile Options
Table of Contents
Vol. 26, No. 4, 2009
Issue release date: December 2009
Fetal Diagn Ther 2009;26:212–215

Amniotic Fluid Index in Low-Risk, Post-Dates Pregnancies

Griffin M. · Attilakos G. · Greenwood R. · Denbow M.
To view the fulltext, log in and/or choose pay-per-view option

Individual Users: Register with Karger Login Information

Please create your User ID & Password

Contact Information

I have read the Karger Terms and Conditions and agree.

To view the fulltext, please log in

To view the pdf, please log in


Objective: To determine normal values for amniotic fluid index (AFI) in uncomplicated post-dates singleton pregnancies and compare it to current reference ranges. Population: Four hundred and forty-eight women with singleton, uncomplicated pregnancies, presenting for post-dates assessment (gestation 40+0 to 42+0 weeks) between January 1, 2004 and June 30, 2005. Methods: Ultrasound assessment of liquor to calculate the AFI. Results: The mean and standard deviation for AFI in the sample was 9.86 (SD 3.4), which is significantly different to the mean of the currently used reference range (mean 11.6, SD 3.9, p < 0.0001). The 5th percentile in this population was 4.6 cm. Conclusions: This study has demonstrated lower mean and 5th percentile values for AFI in post-dates pregnancies than current reference ranges. It has the largest published UK study population, and can therefore be used as a reference range in similar populations, which is likely to reduce unnecessary obstetric interventions.

Copyright / Drug Dosage

Copyright: All rights reserved. No part of this publication may be translated into other languages, reproduced or utilized in any form or by any means, electronic or mechanical, including photocopying, recording, microcopying, or by any information storage and retrieval system, without permission in writing from the publisher or, in the case of photocopying, direct payment of a specified fee to the Copyright Clearance Center.
Drug Dosage: The authors and the publisher have exerted every effort to ensure that drug selection and dosage set forth in this text are in accord with current recommendations and practice at the time of publication. However, in view of ongoing research, changes in goverment regulations, and the constant flow of information relating to drug therapy and drug reactions, the reader is urged to check the package insert for each drug for any changes in indications and dosage and for added warnings and precautions. This is particularly important when the recommended agent is a new and/or infrequently employed drug.
Disclaimer: The statements, opinions and data contained in this publication are solely those of the individual authors and contributors and not of the publishers and the editor(s). The appearance of advertisements or/and product references in the publication is not a warranty, endorsement, or approval of the products or services advertised or of their effectiveness, quality or safety. The publisher and the editor(s) disclaim responsibility for any injury to persons or property resulting from any ideas, methods, instructions or products referred to in the content or advertisements.


  1. Hill LM, Breckle R, Wolfgram KR, O’Brien PC: Oligohydramnios: ultrasonically detected incidence and subsequent fetal outcome. Am J Obstet Gynaecol 1983;147:407–410.
  2. Baron C, Morgan MA, Garite TJ: The impact of amniotic fluid volume assessed intrapartum on perinatal outcome. Am J Obstet Gynaecol 1995;173:167–164.
  3. Morris JM, Thompson K, Smithey J, Gaffney G, Cooke I, Chamberlain P, Hope P, Altman D, MacKenzie IZ: The usefulness of ultrasound assessment of amniotic fluid in predicting adverse outcome in prolonged pregnancy: a prospective blinded observational study. Br J Obstet Gynaecol 2003;110:989–994.
  4. Phelan JP, Ohn MO, Smith CV, Rutherford SE, Anderson E: Amniotic fluid index measurements during pregnancy. J Reprod Med 1987;32:601–604.
  5. Moore TR, Cayle JE: The amniotic fluid index in normal human pregnancy. Am J Obset Gynaecol 1990;162:1168–1173.
  6. Divon MY, Marks AD, Henderson CE: Longitudinal measurement of amniotic fluid index in post dates pregnancies and its association with fetal outcome. Am J Obstet Gynaecol 1985;172:142–146.

    External Resources

  7. Anandakumar C, Birwas A, Arulkumuran S, Wong YC, Malarvishy G, Ratnam SS: Should assessment of amniotic fluid volume form an integral part of antenatal fetal surveillance of high risk pregnancy? Aust NZ J Obstet Gynaecol 1993;33:272–275.
  8. Montan S, Malcus P: Amniotic fluid index in prolonged pregnancy: a cohort study. J Matern Fetal Invest 1995;5:4–7.
  9. Magann EF, Sanderson M, Martin JN, Chauhan S: The amniotic fluid index, single deepest pocket, and two-diameter pocket in normal human pregnancy. Am J Obstet Gynaecol 2000;182:1581–1588.
  10. National Institute for Clinical Excellence. Inherited Clinical Guideline C: The use of electronic fetal monitoring: The use and interpretation of cardiotocography in intrapartum fetal surveillance. May, 2001.
  11. Alfirevic Z, Luckas M, Walkinshaw SA, McFarlane M, Curran R: A randomised comparison between amniotic fluid index and maximum pool depth in the monitoring of post-term pregnancy. Br J Obstet Gynaecol 1997;104:207–211.
  12. Yoder B, Kirsch E, Barth W, Gordon M: Changing obstetric practices associated with decreasing incidence of meconium aspiration syndrome. Obstet Gynaecol 2002;99:731–739.
  13. Nwosu EC, Welch CR, Manasse PR, Walkinshaw SA: Longitudinal assessment of amniotic fluid index. Br J Obstet Gynaecol 1993;100:816–819.

Pay-per-View Options
Direct payment This item at the regular price: USD 33.00
Payment from account With a Karger Pay-per-View account (down payment USD 150) you profit from a special rate for this and other single items.
This item at the discounted price: USD 23.00