Download PDFPDF

Do well infants born with an isolated single umbilical artery need investigation?
Compose Response

Plain text

  • No HTML tags allowed.
  • Web page addresses and e-mail addresses turn into links automatically.
  • Lines and paragraphs break automatically.
Author Information
First or given name, e.g. 'Peter'.
Your last, or family, name, e.g. 'MacMoody'.
Your email address, e.g.
Your role and/or occupation, e.g. 'Orthopedic Surgeon'.
Your organization or institution (if applicable), e.g. 'Royal Free Hospital'.
Statement of Competing Interests


  • A rapid response is a moderated but not peer reviewed online response to a published article in a BMJ journal; it will not receive a DOI and will not be indexed unless it is also republished as a Letter, Correspondence or as other content. Find out more about rapid responses.
  • We intend to post all responses which are approved by the Editor, within 14 days (BMJ Journals) or 24 hours (The BMJ), however timeframes cannot be guaranteed. Responses must comply with our requirements and should contribute substantially to the topic, but it is at our absolute discretion whether we publish a response, and we reserve the right to edit or remove responses before and after publication and also republish some or all in other BMJ publications, including third party local editions in other countries and languages
  • Our requirements are stated in our rapid response terms and conditions and must be read. These include ensuring that: i) you do not include any illustrative content including tables and graphs, ii) you do not include any information that includes specifics about any patients,iii) you do not include any original data, unless it has already been published in a peer reviewed journal and you have included a reference, iv) your response is lawful, not defamatory, original and accurate, v) you declare any competing interests, vi) you understand that your name and other personal details set out in our rapid response terms and conditions will be published with any responses we publish and vii) you understand that once a response is published, we may continue to publish your response and/or edit or remove it in the future.
  • By submitting this rapid response you are agreeing to our terms and conditions for rapid responses and understand that your personal data will be processed in accordance with those terms and our privacy notice.
This question is for testing whether or not you are a human visitor and to prevent automated spam submissions.

Vertical Tabs

Other responses

Jump to comment:

  • Published on:
    Need for a national consensus

    Dear Editor

    I found the best evidence review very interesting. I just wanted to comment that there seems to be a very strong suggention that all babies with single umbilical artery should have a renal USG and an MCUG and the author has provided a strong arguement for the same. but having worked in 7 hospitals all over the country, I am amazed at the variability of practices. I have worked in hospitals which follow the...

    Show More
    Conflict of Interest:
    None declared.
  • Published on:

    Dear Editor,

    I am concerned that the conclusion arrived at by the authors that "it seems prudent to investigate... by means of a micturating cystourethrogram (MCUG)" is unjustified.

    Micturating cystourethrogram is an invasive test involving discomfort, cost and radiation. We must justify its use by evidence that the information it provides is likely to influence management or prognosis.

    The aut...

    Show More
    Conflict of Interest:
    None declared.
  • Published on:
    Screening infants with single umbilical artery (SUA)

    Dear Editor,

    Srinivasan and Arora (in a section described, amusingly, as evidence based) suggest that screening newborn infants for vesicoureteric reflux (VUR) by micturating cystourethrography (MCUG) "seems prudent" and the Clinical Bottom Line notes that MCUG is a "useful investigation" to detect renal anomalies in infants with SUA.

    The authors address neither of the following:
    1. VUR...

    Show More
    Conflict of Interest:
    None declared.