Literature DB >> 30013607

Fetal growth surveillance - Current guidelines, practices and challenges.

Mandy Williams1, Sue Turner1, Emily Butler1, Jason Gardosi1.   

Abstract

Antenatal surveillance of fetal growth is an essential part of good maternity care, as lack of detection of fetal growth restriction is directly associated with stillbirth and perinatal morbidity. New algorithms and guidelines provide care pathways which rely on regular third trimester ultrasound biometry and plotting of estimated fetal weight in pregnancies considered to be at increased risk, and their implementation has increased pressures on ultrasound resources. Customised growth charts have improved the distinction between constitutional and pathological smallness and reduced unnecessary referrals. Their introduction, together with clinicians' training, e-learning and audit as the key elements of the growth assessment protocol, has resulted in increased antenatal detection of small for gestational age babies and a reduction in avoidable stillbirths. However, missed case audits highlight that further improvements are needed, and point to the need to address quality assurance and resource issues in ultrasound services.

Entities:  

Keywords:  Estimated fetal weight; fetal growth restriction; small for gestational age; stillbirth

Year:  2018        PMID: 30013607      PMCID: PMC6042298          DOI: 10.1177/1742271X18760657

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Ultrasound        ISSN: 1742-271X


  22 in total

1.  Customised antenatal growth charts.

Authors:  J Gardosi; A Chang; B Kalyan; D Sahota; E M Symonds
Journal:  Lancet       Date:  1992-02-01       Impact factor: 79.321

2.  Suspicion of intrauterine growth restriction: Use of abdominal circumference alone or estimated fetal weight below 10%.

Authors:  Suneet P Chauhan; Jill Cole; Maureen Sanderson; Everett F Magann; James A Scardo
Journal:  J Matern Fetal Neonatal Med       Date:  2006-09

3.  Reduction of false-positive diagnosis of fetal growth restriction by application of customized fetal growth standards.

Authors:  M Mongelli; J Gardosi
Journal:  Obstet Gynecol       Date:  1996-11       Impact factor: 7.661

4.  Customized vs INTERGROWTH-21st standards for the assessment of birthweight and stillbirth risk at term.

Authors:  Andre Francis; Oliver Hugh; Jason Gardosi
Journal:  Am J Obstet Gynecol       Date:  2018-02       Impact factor: 8.661

5.  An adjustable fetal weight standard.

Authors:  J Gardosi; M Mongelli; M Wilcox; A Chang
Journal:  Ultrasound Obstet Gynecol       Date:  1995-09       Impact factor: 7.299

6.  International standards for newborn weight, length, and head circumference by gestational age and sex: the Newborn Cross-Sectional Study of the INTERGROWTH-21st Project.

Authors:  José Villar; Leila Cheikh Ismail; Cesar G Victora; Eric O Ohuma; Enrico Bertino; Doug G Altman; Ann Lambert; Aris T Papageorghiou; Maria Carvalho; Yasmin A Jaffer; Michael G Gravett; Manorama Purwar; Ihunnaya O Frederick; Alison J Noble; Ruyan Pang; Fernando C Barros; Cameron Chumlea; Zulfiqar A Bhutta; Stephen H Kennedy
Journal:  Lancet       Date:  2014-09-06       Impact factor: 79.321

7.  INTERGROWTH-21st vs customized birthweight standards for identification of perinatal mortality and morbidity.

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

8.  Maternal and fetal risk factors for stillbirth: population based study.

Authors:  Jason Gardosi; Vichithranie Madurasinghe; Mandy Williams; Asad Malik; André Francis
Journal:  BMJ       Date:  2013-01-24

9.  Association between reduced stillbirth rates in England and regional uptake of accreditation training in customised fetal growth assessment.

Authors:  Jason Gardosi; Sally Giddings; Sally Clifford; Lynne Wood; André Francis
Journal:  BMJ Open       Date:  2013-12-17       Impact factor: 2.692

Review 10.  Stillbirths: recall to action in high-income countries.

Authors:  Vicki Flenady; Aleena M Wojcieszek; Philippa Middleton; David Ellwood; Jan Jaap Erwich; Michael Coory; T Yee Khong; Robert M Silver; Gordon C S Smith; Frances M Boyle; Joy E Lawn; Hannah Blencowe; Susannah Hopkins Leisher; Mechthild M Gross; Dell Horey; Lynn Farrales; Frank Bloomfield; Lesley McCowan; Stephanie J Brown; K S Joseph; Jennifer Zeitlin; Hanna E Reinebrant; Joanne Cacciatore; Claudia Ravaldi; Alfredo Vannacci; Jillian Cassidy; Paul Cassidy; Cindy Farquhar; Euan Wallace; Dimitrios Siassakos; Alexander E P Heazell; Claire Storey; Lynn Sadler; Scott Petersen; J Frederik Frøen; Robert L Goldenberg
Journal:  Lancet       Date:  2016-01-19       Impact factor: 79.321

View more
  4 in total

1.  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

2.  Facilitating safety evaluation in maternal immunization trials: a retrospective cohort study to assess pregnancy outcomes and events of interest in low-risk pregnancies in England.

Authors:  Megan Riley; Dimitra Lambrelli; Sophie Graham; Ouzama Henry; Andrea Sutherland; Alexander Schmidt; Nicola Sawalhi-Leckenby; Robert Donaldson; Sonia K Stoszek
Journal:  BMC Pregnancy Childbirth       Date:  2022-06-01       Impact factor: 3.105

3.  Caveats in the monitoring of fetal growth using ultrasound estimated fetal weight.

Authors:  Nicholas John Dudley; Helen Varley
Journal:  Ultrasound       Date:  2020-09-11

4.  Could a multidisciplinary regional audit identify avoidable factors and delays that contribute to stillbirths? A retrospective cohort study.

Authors:  I Sterpu; J Bolk; S Perers Öberg; I Hulthén Varli; E Wiberg Itzel
Journal:  BMC Pregnancy Childbirth       Date:  2020-11-16       Impact factor: 3.007

  4 in total

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.