Literature DB >> 29422207

A new customized fetal growth standard for African American women: the PRB/NICHD Detroit study.

Adi L Tarca1, Roberto Romero2, Dereje W Gudicha3, Offer Erez4, Edgar Hernandez-Andrade4, Lami Yeo4, Gaurav Bhatti3, Percy Pacora4, Eli Maymon4, Sonia S Hassan5.   

Abstract

BACKGROUND: The assessment of fetal growth disorders requires a standard. Current nomograms for the assessment of fetal growth in African American women have been derived either from neonatal (rather than fetal) biometry data or have not been customized for maternal ethnicity, weight, height, and parity and fetal sex.
OBJECTIVE: We sought to (1) develop a new customized fetal growth standard for African American mothers; and (2) compare such a standard to 3 existing standards for the classification of fetuses as small (SGA) or large (LGA) for gestational age. STUDY
DESIGN: A retrospective cohort study included 4183 women (4001 African American and 182 Caucasian) from the Detroit metropolitan area who underwent ultrasound examinations between 14-40 weeks of gestation (the median number of scans per pregnancy was 5, interquartile range 3-7) and for whom relevant covariate data were available. Longitudinal quantile regression was used to build models defining the "normal" estimated fetal weight (EFW) centiles for gestational age in African American women, adjusted for maternal height, weight, and parity and fetal sex, and excluding pathologic factors with a significant effect on fetal weight. The resulting Perinatology Research Branch/Eunice Kennedy Shriver National Institute of Child Health and Human Development (hereinafter, PRB/NICHD) growth standard was compared to 3 other existing standards--the customized gestation-related optimal weight (GROW) standard; the Eunice Kennedy Shriver National Institute of Child Health and Human Development (hereinafter, NICHD) African American standard; and the multinational World Health Organization (WHO) standard--utilized to screen fetuses for SGA (<10th centile) or LGA (>90th centile) based on the last available ultrasound examination for each pregnancy.
RESULTS: First, the mean birthweight at 40 weeks was 133 g higher for neonates born to Caucasian than to African American mothers and 150 g higher for male than female neonates; maternal weight, height, and parity had a positive effect on birthweight. Second, analysis of longitudinal EFW revealed the following features of fetal growth: (1) all weight centiles were about 2% higher for male than for female fetuses; (2) maternal height had a positive effect on EFW, with larger fetuses being affected more (2% increase in the 95th centile of weight for each 10-cm increase in height); and (3) maternal weight and parity had a positive effect on EFW that increased with gestation and varied among the weight centiles. Third, the screen-positive rate for SGA was 7.2% for the NICHD African American standard, 12.3% for the GROW standard, 13% for the WHO standard customized by fetal sex, and 14.4% for the PRB/NICHD customized standard. For all standards, the screen-positive rate for SGA was at least 2-fold higher among fetuses delivered preterm than at term. Fourth, the screen-positive rate for LGA was 8.7% for the GROW standard, 9.2% for the PRB/NICHD customized standard, 10.8% for the WHO standard customized by fetal sex, and 12.3% for the NICHD African American standard. Finally, the highest overall agreement among standards was between the GROW and PRB/NICHD customized standards (Cohen's interrater agreement, kappa = 0.85).
CONCLUSION: We developed a novel customized PRB/NICHD fetal growth standard from fetal data in an African American population without assuming proportionality of the effects of covariates, and without assuming that these effects are equal on all centiles of weight; we also provide an easy-to-use centile calculator. This standard classified more fetuses as being at risk for SGA compared to existing standards, especially among fetuses delivered preterm, but classified about the same number of LGA. The comparison among the 4 growth standards also revealed that the most important factor determining agreement among standards is whether they account for the same factors known to affect fetal growth.
Copyright © 2017 Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved.

Entities:  

Keywords:  comparison of fetal growth standards; customized fetal growth standards; ethnic differences; fetal biometry; fetal growth restriction; fetal sex; large for gestational age; maternal height; maternal weight; parity; quantile regression; small for gestational age

Mesh:

Year:  2018        PMID: 29422207      PMCID: PMC5815382          DOI: 10.1016/j.ajog.2017.12.229

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Am J Obstet Gynecol        ISSN: 0002-9378            Impact factor:   8.661


  74 in total

1.  Design and analysis of studies to derive charts of fetal size.

Authors:  D G Altman; L S Chitty
Journal:  Ultrasound Obstet Gynecol       Date:  1993-11-01       Impact factor: 7.299

2.  The role of growth trajectories in classifying fetal growth restriction.

Authors:  Edward D Barker; Fionnuala M McAuliffe; Fiona Alderdice; Julia Unterscheider; Sean Daly; Michael P Geary; Mairead M Kennelly; Keelin O'Donoghue; Alyson Hunter; John J Morrison; Gerard Burke; Patrick Dicker; Elizabeth C Tully; Fergal D Malone
Journal:  Obstet Gynecol       Date:  2013-08       Impact factor: 7.661

3.  Customized estimated fetal weight: a novel antenatal tool to diagnose abnormal fetal growth.

Authors:  Benjamin A Kase; Carlos A Carreno; Sean C Blackwell
Journal:  Am J Obstet Gynecol       Date:  2012-06-13       Impact factor: 8.661

4.  Prenatal detection of fetal growth restriction in newborns classified as small for gestational age: correlates and risk of neonatal morbidity.

Authors:  Suneet P Chauhan; Hind Beydoun; Eugene Chang; Adam T Sandlin; Josh D Dahlke; Elena Igwe; Everett F Magann; Kristi R Anderson; Alfred Z Abuhamad; Cande V Ananth
Journal:  Am J Perinatol       Date:  2013-04-16       Impact factor: 1.862

5.  Charts of fetal size: 3. Abdominal measurements.

Authors:  L S Chitty; D G Altman; A Henderson; S Campbell
Journal:  Br J Obstet Gynaecol       Date:  1994-02

6.  A practical classification of newborn infants by weight and gestational age.

Authors:  F C Battaglia; L O Lubchenco
Journal:  J Pediatr       Date:  1967-08       Impact factor: 4.406

7.  Prepregnancy weight, weight gain, and birth weight.

Authors:  B F Abrams; R K Laros
Journal:  Am J Obstet Gynecol       Date:  1986-03       Impact factor: 8.661

8.  Maternal anthropometrics are associated with fetal size in different periods of pregnancy and at birth. The Generation R Study.

Authors:  L Ay; C J Kruithof; R Bakker; E A P Steegers; J C M Witteman; H A Moll; A Hofman; J P Mackenbach; A C S Hokken-Koelega; V W V Jaddoe
Journal:  BJOG       Date:  2009-04-15       Impact factor: 6.531

9.  Defining Abnormal Fetal Growth and Perinatal Risk: Population or Customized Standards?

Authors:  Sarah J Stock; Jenny Myers
Journal:  PLoS Med       Date:  2017-01-31       Impact factor: 11.069

10.  Screening for fetal growth restriction with universal third trimester ultrasonography in nulliparous women in the Pregnancy Outcome Prediction (POP) study: a prospective cohort study.

Authors:  Ulla Sovio; Ian R White; Alison Dacey; Dharmintra Pasupathy; Gordon C S Smith
Journal:  Lancet       Date:  2015-09-07       Impact factor: 79.321

View more
  13 in total

1.  Fetal size standards to diagnose a small- or a large-for-gestational-age fetus.

Authors:  Roberto Romero; Adi L Tarca
Journal:  Am J Obstet Gynecol       Date:  2018-02       Impact factor: 8.661

2.  FIGO (international Federation of Gynecology and obstetrics) initiative on fetal growth: best practice advice for screening, diagnosis, and management of fetal growth restriction.

Authors:  Nir Melamed; Ahmet Baschat; Yoav Yinon; Apostolos Athanasiadis; Federico Mecacci; Francesc Figueras; Vincenzo Berghella; Amala Nazareth; Muna Tahlak; H David McIntyre; Fabrício Da Silva Costa; Anne B Kihara; Eran Hadar; Fionnuala McAuliffe; Mark Hanson; Ronald C Ma; Rachel Gooden; Eyal Sheiner; Anil Kapur; Hema Divakar; Diogo Ayres-de-Campos; Liran Hiersch; Liona C Poon; John Kingdom; Roberto Romero; Moshe Hod
Journal:  Int J Gynaecol Obstet       Date:  2021-03       Impact factor: 3.561

3.  Prediction of adverse perinatal outcome by fetal biometry: comparison of customized and population-based standards.

Authors:  D Kabiri; R Romero; D W Gudicha; E Hernandez-Andrade; P Pacora; N Benshalom-Tirosh; D Tirosh; L Yeo; O Erez; S S Hassan; A L Tarca
Journal:  Ultrasound Obstet Gynecol       Date:  2020-02       Impact factor: 7.299

4.  Prediction of preeclampsia throughout gestation with maternal characteristics and biophysical and biochemical markers: a longitudinal study.

Authors:  Adi L Tarca; Andreea Taran; Roberto Romero; Eunjung Jung; Carmen Paredes; Gaurav Bhatti; Corina Ghita; Tinnakorn Chaiworapongsa; Nandor Gabor Than; Chaur-Dong Hsu
Journal:  Am J Obstet Gynecol       Date:  2021-04-16       Impact factor: 8.661

5.  Mechanisms of death in structurally normal stillbirths.

Authors:  Percy Pacora; Roberto Romero; Sunil Jaiman; Offer Erez; Gaurav Bhatti; Bogdan Panaitescu; Neta Benshalom-Tirosh; Eun Jung Jung; Chaur-Dong Hsu; Sonia S Hassan; Lami Yeo; Nicholas Kadar
Journal:  J Perinat Med       Date:  2019-02-25       Impact factor: 2.716

6.  Fetal growth percentile software: a tool to calculate estimated fetal weight percentiles for 6 standards.

Authors:  Gaurav Bhatti; Roberto Romero; Kiran Cherukuri; Dereje W Gudicha; Lami Yeo; Mahendra Kavdia; Adi L Tarca
Journal:  Am J Obstet Gynecol       Date:  2020-02-15       Impact factor: 10.693

7.  Preterm labor is characterized by a high abundance of amniotic fluid prostaglandins in patients with intra-amniotic infection or sterile intra-amniotic inflammation.

Authors:  Hassendrini N Peiris; Roberto Romero; Kanchan Vaswani; Sarah Reed; Nardhy Gomez-Lopez; Adi L Tarca; Dereje W Gudicha; Offer Erez; Eli Maymon; Murray D Mitchell
Journal:  J Matern Fetal Neonatal Med       Date:  2019-12-29

8.  Fetal growth standards for Somali population.

Authors:  Hiba J Mustafa; Katelyn M Tessier; Lauren A Reagan; Xianghua Luo; Stephen A Contag
Journal:  J Matern Fetal Neonatal Med       Date:  2019-09-23

9.  Personalized assessment of cervical length improves prediction of spontaneous preterm birth: a standard and a percentile calculator.

Authors:  Dereje W Gudicha; Roberto Romero; Doron Kabiri; Edgar Hernandez-Andrade; Percy Pacora; Offer Erez; Juan Pedro Kusanovic; Eunjung Jung; Carmen Paredes; Stanley M Berry; Lami Yeo; Sonia S Hassan; Chaur-Dong Hsu; Adi L Tarca
Journal:  Am J Obstet Gynecol       Date:  2020-09-09       Impact factor: 8.661

10.  Heterogeneity in fetal growth velocity.

Authors:  Noriko Sato; Naoyuki Miyasaka
Journal:  Sci Rep       Date:  2019-08-05       Impact factor: 4.379

View more

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.