Literature DB >> 33552223

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

Nicholas John Dudley1, Helen Varley2.   

Abstract

INTRODUCTION: Ultrasound estimated fetal weight is increasingly being used in the monitoring of fetal growth. Differences between estimated fetal weight formulae, curves and measurement methods could lead to significant differences in results. The aim of this study was to investigate the potential impact of these differences on estimated fetal weight and its use in monitoring fetal growth, both by modelling and by analysis of ultrasound scan data.
METHODS: Four estimated fetal weight curves were compared in their original form and also normalised to term weight. Estimated fetal weight was calculated from 50th centiles of widely used charts of abdominal and head circumference and femur length and plotted on a widely used estimated fetal weight curve. Fetal measurement data were used to assess the impact of fetal proportions on estimated fetal weight error and on growth trajectory when different estimated fetal weight formulae are used.
RESULTS: Estimated fetal weight curves differ significantly, but after normalisation there is closer agreement. Estimated fetal weight modelled using modern measurement methods differs from the widely used estimated fetal weight growth curve. Errors in estimated fetal weight are correlated with differences in fetal proportions and this can lead to significant changes in estimated fetal weight growth trajectory if different estimated fetal weight formulae are used.
CONCLUSIONS: Choice of measurement methods, estimated fetal weight formulae and growth curves have a significant effect on estimated fetal weight growth trajectories relative to normal ranges. It is important to understand these caveats when using estimated fetal weight to monitor fetal growth.
© The Author(s) 2020.

Entities:  

Keywords:  Ultrasound; estimated fetal weight; fetal growth

Year:  2020        PMID: 33552223      PMCID: PMC7844469          DOI: 10.1177/1742271X20954508

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


  34 in total

1.  Practice guidelines for performance of the routine mid-trimester fetal ultrasound scan.

Authors:  L J Salomon; Z Alfirevic; V Berghella; C Bilardo; E Hernandez-Andrade; S L Johnsen; K Kalache; K-Y Leung; G Malinger; H Munoz; F Prefumo; A Toi; W Lee
Journal:  Ultrasound Obstet Gynecol       Date:  2011-01       Impact factor: 7.299

2.  In utero analysis of fetal growth: a sonographic weight standard.

Authors:  F P Hadlock; R B Harrist; J Martinez-Poyer
Journal:  Radiology       Date:  1991-10       Impact factor: 11.105

3.  A customized standard of large size for gestational age to predict intrapartum morbidity.

Authors:  Jacob C Larkin; Paul D Speer; Hyagriv N Simhan
Journal:  Am J Obstet Gynecol       Date:  2011-03-05       Impact factor: 8.661

Review 4.  Customized growth charts: rationale, validation and clinical benefits.

Authors:  Jason Gardosi; Andre Francis; Sue Turner; Mandy Williams
Journal:  Am J Obstet Gynecol       Date:  2018-02       Impact factor: 8.661

5.  Charts of fetal size: 2. Head measurements.

Authors:  L S Chitty; D G Altman; A Henderson; S Campbell
Journal:  Br J Obstet Gynaecol       Date:  1994-01

6.  Gestation-adjusted projection of estimated fetal weight.

Authors:  M Mongelli; J Gardosi
Journal:  Acta Obstet Gynecol Scand       Date:  1996-01       Impact factor: 3.636

7.  Charts of fetal size: 4. Femur length.

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

8.  A date-independent predictor of intrauterine growth retardation: femur length/abdominal circumference ratio.

Authors:  F P Hadlock; R L Deter; R B Harrist; E Roecker; S K Park
Journal:  AJR Am J Roentgenol       Date:  1983-11       Impact factor: 3.959

9.  The World Health Organization Fetal Growth Charts: A Multinational Longitudinal Study of Ultrasound Biometric Measurements and Estimated Fetal Weight.

Authors:  Torvid Kiserud; Gilda Piaggio; Guillermo Carroli; Mariana Widmer; José Carvalho; Lisa Neerup Jensen; Daniel Giordano; José Guilherme Cecatti; Hany Abdel Aleem; Sameera A Talegawkar; Alexandra Benachi; Anke Diemert; Antoinette Tshefu Kitoto; Jadsada Thinkhamrop; Pisake Lumbiganon; Ann Tabor; Alka Kriplani; Rogelio Gonzalez Perez; Kurt Hecher; Mark A Hanson; A Metin Gülmezoglu; Lawrence D Platt
Journal:  PLoS Med       Date:  2017-01-24       Impact factor: 11.069

10.  International estimated fetal weight standards of the INTERGROWTH-21st Project.

Authors:  J Stirnemann; J Villar; L J Salomon; E Ohuma; P Ruyan; D G Altman; F Nosten; R Craik; S Munim; L Cheikh Ismail; F C Barros; A Lambert; S Norris; M Carvalho; Y A Jaffer; J A Noble; E Bertino; M G Gravett; M Purwar; C G Victora; R Uauy; Z Bhutta; S Kennedy; A T Papageorghiou
Journal:  Ultrasound Obstet Gynecol       Date:  2017-03-05       Impact factor: 7.299

View more

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.