Literature DB >> 30707967

Prediction of small for gestational age neonates: screening by maternal factors, fetal biometry, and biomarkers at 35-37 weeks' gestation.

Anca Ciobanu1, Angeliki Rouvali1, Argyro Syngelaki1, Ranjit Akolekar2, Kypros H Nicolaides3.   

Abstract

BACKGROUND: Small for gestational age (SGA) neonates are at increased risk for perinatal mortality and morbidity; however, the risks can be substantially reduced if the condition is identified prenatally, because in such cases close monitoring and appropriate timing of delivery and prompt neonatal care can be undertaken. The traditional approach of identifying pregnancies with SGA fetuses is maternal abdominal palpation and serial measurements of symphysial-fundal height, but the detection rate of this approach is less than 30%. A higher performance of screening for SGA is achieved by sonographic fetal biometry during the third trimester; screening at 30-34 weeks' gestation identifies about 80% of SGA neonates delivering preterm but only 50% of those delivering at term, at a screen-positive rate of 10%. There is some evidence that routine ultrasound examination at 36 weeks' gestation is more effective than that at 32 weeks in predicting birth of SGA neonates.
OBJECTIVE: To investigate the potential value of maternal characteristics and medical history, sonographically estimated fetal weight (EFW) and biomarkers of impaired placentation at 35+0- 36+6 weeks' gestation in the prediction of delivery of SGA neonates.
MATERIALS AND METHODS: A dataset of 19,209 singleton pregnancies undergoing screening at 35+0-36+6 weeks' gestation was divided into a training set and a validation set. The training dataset was used to develop models from multivariable logistic regression analysis to determine whether the addition of uterine artery pulsatility index (UtA-PI), umbilical artery PI (UA-PI), fetal middle cerebral artery PI (MCA-PI), maternal serum placental growth factor (PlGF) and soluble fms-like tyrosine kinase-1 (sFLT) would improve the performance of maternal factors and EFW in the prediction of delivery of SGA neonates. The models were then tested in the validation dataset to assess performance of screening.
RESULTS: First, in the training dataset, in the SGA group, compared to those with birthweight in ≥10th percentile, the median multiple of the median (MoM) values of PlGF and MCA-PI were reduced, whereas UtA-PI, UA-PI, and sFLT were increased. Second, multivariable regression analysis demonstrated that in the prediction of SGA in <10th percentile there were significant contributions from maternal factors, EFW Z-score, UtA-PI MoM, MCA-PI MoM, and PlGF MoM. Third, in the validation dataset, prediction of 90% of SGA neonates delivering within 2 weeks of assessment was achieved by a screen-positive rate of 67% (95% confidence interval [CI], 64-70%) in screening by maternal factors, 23% (95% CI, 20-26%) by maternal factors, and EFW and 21% (95% CI, 19-24%) by the addition of biomarkers. Fourth, prediction of 90% of SGA neonates delivering at any stage after assessment was achieved by a screen-positive rate of 66% (95% CI, 65-67%) in screening by maternal factors, 32% (95% CI, 31-33%) by maternal factors and EFW and 30% (95% CI, 29-31%) by the addition of biomarkers.
CONCLUSION: The addition of biomarkers of impaired placentation only marginally improves the predictive performance for delivery of SGA neonates achieved by maternal factors and fetal biometry at 35+0-36+6 weeks' gestation.
Copyright © 2019 Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved.

Entities:  

Keywords:  angiogenic factors; antiangiogenic factors; biomarkers; fetal growth restriction; middle cerebral artery Doppler; placental growth factor; small for gestational age; soluble fms-like tyrosine kinase-1; third trimester screening; umbilical artery Doppler; uterine artery Doppler

Mesh:

Substances:

Year:  2019        PMID: 30707967     DOI: 10.1016/j.ajog.2019.01.227

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


  9 in total

1.  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

2.  Fetal and Neonatal Middle Cerebral Artery Hemodynamic Changes and Significance under Ultrasound Detection in Hypertensive Disorder Complicating Pregnancy Patients with Different Severities.

Authors:  Pei Zhou; Yi Sun; Yongpan Tan; Yanru An; Xingxing Wang; Lufang Wang
Journal:  Comput Math Methods Med       Date:  2022-06-28       Impact factor: 2.809

Review 3.  Clinical Opinion: The diagnosis and management of suspected fetal growth restriction: an evidence-based approach.

Authors:  Christoph C Lees; Roberto Romero; Tamara Stampalija; Andrea Dall'Asta; Greggory A DeVore; Federico Prefumo; Tiziana Frusca; Gerard H A Visser; John C Hobbins; Ahmet A Baschat; Caterina M Bilardo; Henry L Galan; Stuart Campbell; Dev Maulik; Francesc Figueras; Wesley Lee; Julia Unterscheider; Herbert Valensise; Fabricio Da Silva Costa; Laurent J Salomon; Liona C Poon; Enrico Ferrazzi; Giancarlo Mari; Giuseppe Rizzo; John C Kingdom; Torvid Kiserud; Kurt Hecher
Journal:  Am J Obstet Gynecol       Date:  2022-01-10       Impact factor: 10.693

4.  Placental protein levels in maternal serum are associated with adverse pregnancy outcomes in nulliparous patients.

Authors:  Samuel Parry; Benjamin A Carper; William A Grobman; Ronald J Wapner; Judith H Chung; David M Haas; Brian Mercer; Robert M Silver; Hyagriv N Simhan; George R Saade; Uma M Reddy; Corette B Parker
Journal:  Am J Obstet Gynecol       Date:  2022-04-26       Impact factor: 10.693

5.  Impact of biometric measurement error on identification of small- and large-for-gestational-age fetuses.

Authors:  D Wright; A Wright; E Smith; K H Nicolaides
Journal:  Ultrasound Obstet Gynecol       Date:  2020-01-08       Impact factor: 7.299

6.  The evaluating of pregnancy-associated plasma protein-A with the likelihood of small for gestational age.

Authors:  Maryam Sadat Hoseini; Samaneh Sheibani; Mehrdad Sheikhvatan
Journal:  Obstet Gynecol Sci       Date:  2020-04-16

7.  "Screening for small-for-gestational age neonates at early third trimester in a high-risk population for preeclampsia".

Authors:  Raquel Mula; Eva Meler; Sandra García; Gerard Albaigés; Bernat Serra; Elena Scazzocchio; Pilar Prats
Journal:  BMC Pregnancy Childbirth       Date:  2020-09-25       Impact factor: 3.007

8.  Interpreting the role of nuchal fold for fetal growth restriction prediction using machine learning.

Authors:  Lung Yun Teng; Citra Nurfarah Zaini Mattar; Arijit Biswas; Wai Lam Hoo; Shier Nee Saw
Journal:  Sci Rep       Date:  2022-03-10       Impact factor: 4.379

9.  Late pregnancy ultrasound parameters identifying fetuses at risk of adverse perinatal outcomes: a protocol for a systematic review of systematic reviews.

Authors:  Adeniyi Kolade Aderoba; Naima Nasir; Maria Quigley; Lawrence Impey; Oliver Rivero-Arias; Jennifer J Kurinczuk
Journal:  BMJ Open       Date:  2022-03-23       Impact factor: 2.692

  9 in total

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.