Russell L Deter1, Wesley Lee1,2, John Kingdom3, Roberto Romero2,4,5,6. 1. a Department of Obstetrics and Gynecology , Texas Children's Hospital, Baylor College of Medicine , Houston , TX , USA. 2. b Perinatology Research Branch, Program for Perinatal Research and Obstetrics, Division of Intramural Research , Eunice Kennedy Shriver National Institute of Child Health and Human Development, National Institutes of Health , Bethesda , MD and Detroit , MI , USA. 3. c Division of Maternal Fetal Medicine , Mount Sinai Hospital, University of Toronto , Toronto , ON , Canada. 4. d Department of Obstetrics and Gynecology , University of Michigan , Ann Arbor , MI , USA. 5. e Department of Epidemiology & Biostatistics , Michigan State University , East Lansing , MI , USA. 6. f Department of Molecular Obstetrics and Genetics , Wayne State University , Detroit , MI , USA.
Abstract
OBJECTIVE: To evaluate the validity of second trimester growth velocities as measures of fetal growth potential in Small-for-Gestational-Age (SGA) singletons. METHODS: Second trimester growth velocities for biparietal diameter (BPD), head circumference (HC), abdominal circumference (AC) and femur diaphysis length (FDL) were determined by linear regression analysis or direct measurement in 53 SGA singletons with normal growth outcomes (SGA N Group) and 73 with growth restriction (SGA GR) based on a composite fetal growth pathology score (FGPS1). The latter were subdivided into six groups based on their growth restriction pattern (Patterns group). Similar data were available for 118 singletons with normal neonatal growth outcomes (NNGO group). Coefficients of determination (R2) and growth velocities for each anatomical parameter were compared between Patterns subgroups and the SGA N, SGA GR and NNGO groups. RESULTS: Median R2 values in the six Patterns subgroups ranged from 98.2% (Pattern 2, FDL) to 99.9% (Pattern 5, AC). Within each anatomical parameter set, no significant differences were found (Kruskal-Wallis). Patterns subgroup data were pooled to form the SGA GR group for each anatomical parameter. Mean values for the three main groups ranged from 98.4% (SGA N, FDL) to 99.6% (SGA N, HC). No significant differences between groups (ANOVA) were found for any anatomical parameter (ANOVA). Only 1.7-3.8% had R2 values <95th%. No significant differences in median second trimester growth velocities among different Patterns subgroups were found for any anatomical parameter. In the SGA N and SGA GR groups, mean BPD and HC values did not differ but were significantly smaller than the NNGO group values. No differences in mean FDL values were seen. With AC, all three means were significantly different, having the following order: NNGO > SGA N > SGA GR. Of all 504 second trimester growth rates, 92.5% were within their respective 95% reference ranges. CONCLUSION: Growth in the second trimester is linear in fetuses at risk for growth restriction. Except for FDL, growth velocities were lower than those for fetuses with NNGO. Only AC had mean velocities that differed between the SGA N and the SGA GR groups. Since most velocities (92.5%) were within normal reference ranges, they are reasonable measures of growth potential in fetuses at risk for growth restriction.
OBJECTIVE: To evaluate the validity of second trimester growth velocities as measures of fetal growth potential in Small-for-Gestational-Age (SGA) singletons. METHODS: Second trimester growth velocities for biparietal diameter (BPD), head circumference (HC), abdominal circumference (AC) and femur diaphysis length (FDL) were determined by linear regression analysis or direct measurement in 53 SGA singletons with normal growth outcomes (SGA N Group) and 73 with growth restriction (SGA GR) based on a composite fetal growth pathology score (FGPS1). The latter were subdivided into six groups based on their growth restriction pattern (Patterns group). Similar data were available for 118 singletons with normal neonatal growth outcomes (NNGO group). Coefficients of determination (R2) and growth velocities for each anatomical parameter were compared between Patterns subgroups and the SGA N, SGA GR and NNGO groups. RESULTS: Median R2 values in the six Patterns subgroups ranged from 98.2% (Pattern 2, FDL) to 99.9% (Pattern 5, AC). Within each anatomical parameter set, no significant differences were found (Kruskal-Wallis). Patterns subgroup data were pooled to form the SGA GR group for each anatomical parameter. Mean values for the three main groups ranged from 98.4% (SGA N, FDL) to 99.6% (SGA N, HC). No significant differences between groups (ANOVA) were found for any anatomical parameter (ANOVA). Only 1.7-3.8% had R2 values <95th%. No significant differences in median second trimester growth velocities among different Patterns subgroups were found for any anatomical parameter. In the SGA N and SGA GR groups, mean BPD and HC values did not differ but were significantly smaller than the NNGO group values. No differences in mean FDL values were seen. With AC, all three means were significantly different, having the following order: NNGO > SGA N > SGA GR. Of all 504 second trimester growth rates, 92.5% were within their respective 95% reference ranges. CONCLUSION: Growth in the second trimester is linear in fetuses at risk for growth restriction. Except for FDL, growth velocities were lower than those for fetuses with NNGO. Only AC had mean velocities that differed between the SGA N and the SGA GR groups. Since most velocities (92.5%) were within normal reference ranges, they are reasonable measures of growth potential in fetuses at risk for growth restriction.
Entities:
Keywords:
Individualized growth assessment; SGA; longitudinal growth study
Authors: Radek Bukowski; Tatsuo Uchida; Gordon C S Smith; Fergal D Malone; Robert H Ball; David A Nyberg; Christine H Comstock; Gary D V Hankins; Richard L Berkowitz; Susan J Gross; Lorraine Dugoff; Sabrina D Craigo; Ilan E Timor; Stephen R Carr; Honor M Wolfe; Mary E D'Alton Journal: Obstet Gynecol Date: 2008-05 Impact factor: 7.661
Authors: Russell L Deter; Wesley Lee; Haleh Sangi-Haghpeykar; Adi L Tarca; Lami Yeo; Roberto Romero Journal: J Matern Fetal Neonatal Med Date: 2014-07-11
Authors: Aris T Papageorghiou; Eric O Ohuma; Douglas G Altman; Tullia Todros; Leila Cheikh Ismail; Ann Lambert; Yasmin A Jaffer; Enrico Bertino; Michael G Gravett; Manorama Purwar; J Alison Noble; Ruyan Pang; Cesar G Victora; Fernando C Barros; Maria Carvalho; Laurent J Salomon; Zulfiqar A Bhutta; Stephen H Kennedy; José Villar Journal: Lancet Date: 2014-09-06 Impact factor: 79.321
Authors: Ngaire H Anderson; Lynn C Sadler; Christopher J D McKinlay; Lesley M E McCowan Journal: Am J Obstet Gynecol Date: 2015-11-04 Impact factor: 8.661
Authors: Silvia Alonso; Sara Caceres; Daniel Vélez; Luis Sanz; Gema Silvan; Maria Jose Illera; Juan Carlos Illera Journal: BMC Pregnancy Childbirth Date: 2021-02-09 Impact factor: 3.007