Literature DB >> 30485470

Are selection criteria for healthy pregnancies responsible for the gap between fetal growth in the French national Elfe birth cohort and the Intergrowth-21st fetal growth standards?

Barbara Heude1,2, Morgane Le Guern1,2, Anne Forhan1,2, Pauline Scherdel1,2,3,4, Manik Kadawathagedara1,2,3, Marie-Noëlle Dufourg4, Corinne Bois5, Marie Cheminat5, François Goffinet2,4, Jérémie Botton1,3, Marie-Aline Charles1,2,5, Jennifer Zeitlin2,4.   

Abstract

BACKGROUND: The Intergrowth-21st (IG) project proposed prescriptive fetal growth standards for global use based on ultrasound measurements from a multicounty study of low-risk pregnancies selected using strict criteria. We examined whether the IG standards are appropriate for fetal growth monitoring in France and whether potential differences could be due to IG criteria for "healthy" pregnancies.
METHOD: We analysed data on femur length and abdominal circumference at the second and/or the third recommended ultrasound examination from 14 607 singleton pregnancies from the Elfe national birth cohort. We compared concordance of centile thresholds using the IG standards and current French references and used restricted cubic splines to plot z-scores by gestational age. A "healthy pregnancy" sub-sample was created based on maternal and pregnancy selection criteria, as specified by IG.
RESULTS: Mean gestational age-specific z-scores for femur length and abdominal circumference using French references fluctuated around 0 (-0.2 to 0.1), while those based on IG standards were higher (0.3-0.8). Using IG standards, 2.5% and 5.2% of fetuses at the third ultrasound were <10th centile for femur length and abdominal circumference, respectively, and 31.5% and 16.7% were >90th. Only 34% of pregnancies fulfilled IG low-risk criteria, but sub-analyses yielded very similar results.
CONCLUSION: Intergrowth standards differed from fetal biometric measures in France, including among low-risk pregnancies selected to replicate IG's healthy pregnancy sample. These results challenge the project's assumption that careful constitution of a low-risk population makes it possible to describe normative fetal growth across populations.
© 2018 John Wiley & Sons Ltd.

Keywords:  Elfe birth cohort; LGA; SGA; fetal biometry; fetal growth; intergrowth-21st

Mesh:

Year:  2018        PMID: 30485470     DOI: 10.1111/ppe.12526

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Paediatr Perinat Epidemiol        ISSN: 0269-5022            Impact factor:   3.980


  6 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.  Associations of severe adverse perinatal outcomes among continuous birth weight percentiles on different birth weight charts: a secondary analysis of a cluster randomized trial.

Authors:  Hester D Kamphof; Sanne J Gordijn; Wessel Ganzevoort; Viki Verfaille; Pien M Offerhaus; Arie Franx; Eva Pajkrt; Ank de Jonge; Jens Henrichs
Journal:  BMC Pregnancy Childbirth       Date:  2022-04-30       Impact factor: 3.105

3.  The choice of reference chart affects the strength of the association between malaria in pregnancy and small for gestational age: an individual participant data meta-analysis comparing the Intergrowth-21 with a Tanzanian birthweight chart.

Authors:  George Mtove; Daniel T R Minja; Omari Abdul; Samwel Gesase; Kenneth Maleta; Titus H Divala; Noel Patson; Ulla Ashorn; Miriam K Laufer; Mwayiwawo Madanitsa; Per Ashorn; Don Mathanga; Jobiba Chinkhumba; Julie R Gutman; Feiko O Ter Kuile; Sofie Lykke Møller; Ib C Bygbjerg; Michael Alifrangis; Thor Theander; John P A Lusingu; Christentze Schmiegelow
Journal:  Malar J       Date:  2022-10-12       Impact factor: 3.469

4.  Fetal biometry assessment with Intergrowth 21st's and Salomon's equations in rural Burkina Faso.

Authors:  Biébo Bihoun; Serge Henri Zango; Maminata Traoré-Coulibaly; Innocent Valea; Raffaella Ravinetto; Jean-Pierre Van Geertruyden; Umberto D'Alessandro; Halidou Tinto; Annie Robert
Journal:  BMC Pregnancy Childbirth       Date:  2020-08-26       Impact factor: 3.007

5.  Should Fetal Growth Charts Be References or Standards?

Authors:  Jennifer A Hutcheon; Jessica Liauw
Journal:  Epidemiology       Date:  2021-01       Impact factor: 4.860

6.  Assessing fetal growth in Africa: Application of the international WHO and INTERGROWTH-21st standards in a Beninese pregnancy cohort.

Authors:  Emmanuel Yovo; Manfred Accrombessi; Gino Agbota; Alice Hocquette; William Atade; Olaiitan T Ladikpo; Murielle Mehoba; Auguste Degbe; Ghyslain Mombo-Ngoma; Achille Massougbodji; Nikki Jackson; Nadine Fievet; Barbara Heude; Jennifer Zeitlin; Valérie Briand
Journal:  PLoS One       Date:  2022-01-21       Impact factor: 3.240

  6 in total

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.