Literature DB >> 21858886

Performance of third-trimester ultrasound for prediction of small-for-gestational-age neonates and evaluation of contingency screening policies.

A P Souka1, I Papastefanou, A Pilalis, V Michalitsi, D Kassanos.   

Abstract

OBJECTIVES: To assess the performance of third-trimester fetal biometry and fetal Doppler studies for the prediction of small-for-gestational-age (SGA) neonates, and to explore contingency strategies using a first-trimester prediction model based on maternal and fetal parameters and third-trimester ultrasound.
METHODS: This was an observational cross-sectional study of uncomplicated singleton pregnancies. Risk assessment for chromosomal abnormality was carried out in 4702 pregnancies using a combination of ultrasound markers (fetal nuchal translucency thickness (NT) and nasal bone assessment) and biochemistry (free beta-human chorionic gonadotropin (β-hCG) and pregnancy-associated plasma protein-A (PAPP-A)) at 11 to 13 + 6 weeks. Maternal demographic characteristics and method of conception were recorded. Third-trimester (30-34 weeks) fetal biometry (biparietal diameter (BPD), head circumference (HC), abdominal circumference (AC) and femur length (FL)) and umbilical artery (UA) and middle cerebral artery Doppler studies were performed routinely in a subgroup (n = 2310). Reference ranges for birth weight were constructed using the cohort of 4702 women, and neonates were classified as small (SGA, ≤ 5th centile) or appropriate (AGA) for gestational age. First-trimester, third-trimester and integrated first- and third-trimester prediction models for SGA were constructed using regression analysis and three different contingency strategies of rescanning in the third trimester were investigated.
RESULTS: According to the areas under the receiver-operating characteristics curves (AUCs), AC (AUC = 0.85) and ultrasound-estimated fetal weight (EFW, AUC = 0.87) were equally good predictors of SGA. The model was marginally improved by the addition of UA Doppler, smoking status and first-trimester indices (free β-hCG and PAPP-A multiples of the median) (combined model, AUC = 0.88), but the difference was not statistically significant. A contingency strategy of rescanning 50% of the population in the third trimester according to the risk estimated by a first-trimester prediction model yielded a detection rate of 79% for a 25% screen-positive rate.
CONCLUSION: Third-trimester ultrasound is effective in screening for SGA in uncomplicated pregnancies. The use of a contingency screening policy can reduce the need for unnecessary examinations.
Copyright © 2012 ISUOG. Published by John Wiley & Sons, Ltd.

Entities:  

Mesh:

Substances:

Year:  2012        PMID: 21858886     DOI: 10.1002/uog.10078

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Ultrasound Obstet Gynecol        ISSN: 0960-7692            Impact factor:   7.299


  7 in total

1.  Selective versus universal third trimester ultrasound: Time for a rethink? An audit of current practices at a metropolitan Sydney hospital.

Authors:  Kristina King; Jinny Foo; Kirsty Hazelton; Amanda Henry
Journal:  Australas J Ultrasound Med       Date:  2018-03-22

2.  Personalized Model to Predict Small for Gestational Age at Delivery Using Fetal Biometrics, Maternal Characteristics, and Pregnancy Biomarkers: A Retrospective Cohort Study of Births Assisted at a Spanish Hospital.

Authors:  Peña Dieste-Pérez; Ricardo Savirón-Cornudella; Mauricio Tajada-Duaso; Faustino R Pérez-López; Sergio Castán-Mateo; Gerardo Sanz; Luis Mariano Esteban
Journal:  J Pers Med       Date:  2022-05-08

3.  Association of third-trimester abdominal circumference with provider-initiated preterm delivery.

Authors:  Leah K Hawkins; William T Schnettler; Anna M Modest; Michele R Hacker; Diana Rodriguez
Journal:  J Matern Fetal Neonatal Med       Date:  2013-11-11

4.  Biochemical tests of placental function versus ultrasound assessment of fetal size for stillbirth and small-for-gestational-age infants.

Authors:  Alexander Ep Heazell; Dexter Jl Hayes; Melissa Whitworth; Yemisi Takwoingi; Susan E Bayliss; Clare Davenport
Journal:  Cochrane Database Syst Rev       Date:  2019-05-14

5.  Unconditional and conditional standards for fetal abdominal circumference and estimated fetal weight in an ethnic Chinese population: a birth cohort study.

Authors:  Ying Xu; Ngee Lek; Yin Bun Cheung; Arijit Biswas; Lin Lin Su; Kenneth Y C Kwek; George S H Yeo; Shu-E Soh; Seang-Mei Saw; Peter D Gluckman; Yap-Seng Chong
Journal:  BMC Pregnancy Childbirth       Date:  2015-06-25       Impact factor: 3.007

6.  Diagnostic accuracy of placental growth factor and ultrasound parameters to predict the small-for-gestational-age infant in women presenting with reduced symphysis-fundus height.

Authors:  M Griffin; P T Seed; L Webster; J Myers; L MacKillop; N Simpson; D Anumba; A Khalil; M Denbow; A Sau; K Hinshaw; P von Dadelszen; S Benton; J Girling; C W G Redman; L C Chappell; A H Shennan
Journal:  Ultrasound Obstet Gynecol       Date:  2015-07-03       Impact factor: 7.299

7.  Prevalence of abnormal umbilical arterial flow on Doppler ultrasound in low-risk and unselected pregnant women: a systematic review.

Authors:  Joshua P Vogel; Valerie Vannevel; Gianna Robbers; George Gwako; Tina Lavin; Abiodun Adanikin; Tsakane Hlongwane; Robert C Pattinson; Zahida P Qureshi; Olufemi T Oladapo
Journal:  Reprod Health       Date:  2021-02-12       Impact factor: 3.223

  7 in total

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.