Literature DB >> 29352467

Systematic misclassification of gestational age by ultrasound biometry: implications for clinical practice and research methodology in the Nordic countries.

Alkistis Skalkidou1, Merit Kullinger1,2, Marios K Georgakis1, Helle Kieler3, Ulrik S Kesmodel4.   

Abstract

Historically, pregnancy dating has been based on self-reported information on the first day of the last menstrual period. In the 1970s, ultrasound biometry was introduced as an alternative for pregnancy dating and is now the leading method in Nordic countries. The use of ultrasound led to a reduction of post-term births and fewer inductions, and is considered more precise than last menstrual period-based methods for pregnancy dating. Nevertheless, differences in early growth and specific situations, such as maternal obesity, can render its estimates less precise, leading to gestational age misclassification. Clinical implications of ultrasound dating include effect on timely induction in case of post-term pregnancies, treatment with corticosteroids in cases of anticipated preterm delivery and decision on viability in cases of extreme prematurity. Furthermore, gestational age misclassification may influence the numbers and the magnitude of some adverse perinatal outcomes, closely related to gestational age, which are recorded in the Nordic birth registers.
© 2018 Nordic Federation of Societies of Obstetrics and Gynecology.

Entities:  

Keywords:  Nordic countries; Pregnancy dating; gestational age misclassification; last menstrual period; ultrasound biometry

Mesh:

Year:  2018        PMID: 29352467     DOI: 10.1111/aogs.13300

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Acta Obstet Gynecol Scand        ISSN: 0001-6349            Impact factor:   3.636


  3 in total

1.  Swedish intrauterine growth reference ranges of biometric measurements of fetal head, abdomen and femur.

Authors:  Linda Lindström; Mårten Ageheim; Ove Axelsson; Laith Hussain-Alkhateeb; Alkistis Skalkidou; Eva Bergman
Journal:  Sci Rep       Date:  2020-12-31       Impact factor: 4.379

2.  An EPIC predictor of gestational age and its application to newborns conceived by assisted reproductive technologies.

Authors:  Astanand Jugessur; Jon Bohlin; Kristine L Haftorn; Yunsung Lee; William R P Denault; Christian M Page; Haakon E Nustad; Robert Lyle; Håkon K Gjessing; Anni Malmberg; Maria C Magnus; Øyvind Næss; Darina Czamara; Katri Räikkönen; Jari Lahti; Per Magnus; Siri E Håberg
Journal:  Clin Epigenetics       Date:  2021-04-19       Impact factor: 6.551

3.  Maternal psychosocial risk factors and child gestational epigenetic age in a South African birth cohort study.

Authors:  Nastassja Koen; Meaghan J Jones; Raymond T Nhapi; Marilyn T Lake; Kirsten A Donald; Whitney Barnett; Nadia Hoffman; Julia L MacIsaac; Alexander M Morin; David T S Lin; Michael S Kobor; Karestan C Koenen; Heather J Zar; Dan J Stein
Journal:  Transl Psychiatry       Date:  2021-07-02       Impact factor: 6.222

  3 in total

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.