Literature DB >> 33567545

Perinatal Outcomes of Small for Gestational Age in Twin Pregnancies: Twin vs. Singleton Charts.

Veronica Giorgione1,2,3, Corey Briffa1,2, Carolina Di Fabrizio1,2,3, Rohan Bhate1,3, Asma Khalil1,2,3.   

Abstract

Twin pregnancies are commonly assessed using singleton growth and birth weight reference charts. This practice has led to a significant number of twins labelled as small for gestational age (SGA), causing unnecessary interventions and increased risk of iatrogenic preterm birth. However, the use of twin-specific charts remains controversial. This study aims to assess whether twin-specific estimated fetal weight (EFW) and birth weight (BW) charts are more predictive of adverse outcomes compared to singleton charts. Centiles of EFW and BW were calculated using previously published singleton and twin charts. Categorical data were compared using Chi-square or McNemar tests. The study included 1740 twin pregnancies, with the following perinatal adverse outcomes recorded: perinatal death, preterm birth <34 weeks, hypertensive disorders of pregnancy (HDP) and admissions to the neonatal unit (NNU). Twin-specific charts identified prenatally and postnatally a smaller proportion of infants as SGA compared to singleton charts. However, twin charts showed a higher percentage of adverse neonatal outcomes in SGA infants than singleton charts. For example, perinatal death (SGA 7.2% vs. appropriate for gestational age (AGA) 2%, p < 0.0001), preterm birth <34 weeks (SGA 42.1% vs. AGA 16.4%, p < 0.0001), HDP (SGA 21.2% vs. AGA 13.5%, p = 0.015) and NNU admissions (SGA 69% vs. AGA 24%, p < 0.0001), when compared to singleton charts (perinatal death: SGA 2% vs. AGA 1%, p = 0.029), preterm birth <34 weeks: (SGA 20.6% vs. AGA 17.4%, p = 0.020), NNU admission: (SGA 34.5% vs. AGA 23.9%, p < 0.000). There was no significant association between HDP and SGA using the singleton charts (p = 0.696). In SGA infants, according to the twin charts, the incidence of abnormal umbilical artery Doppler was significantly more common than in SGA using the singleton chart (27.0% vs. 8.1%, p < 0.001). In conclusion, singleton charts misclassify a large number of twins as at risk of fetal growth restriction. The evidence suggests that the following twin-specific charts could reduce unnecessary medical interventions prenatally and postnatally.

Entities:  

Keywords:  birth weight; chorionicity-specific; estimated fetal weight; fetal growth restriction; reference charts; singleton; small for gestational age; twin pregnancy; ultrasound

Year:  2021        PMID: 33567545      PMCID: PMC7916041          DOI: 10.3390/jcm10040643

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  J Clin Med        ISSN: 2077-0383            Impact factor:   4.241


  30 in total

1.  Reference Values for Sonographically Estimated Fetal Weight in Twin Gestations Stratified by Chorionicity: A Single Center Study.

Authors:  Rinat Gabbay-Benziv; Sarah Crimmins; Stephen A Contag
Journal:  J Ultrasound Med       Date:  2017-01-10       Impact factor: 2.153

2.  Development of customized fetal growth charts in twins.

Authors:  Tullio Ghi; Federico Prefumo; Anna Fichera; Mariano Lanna; Enrico Periti; Nicola Persico; Elsa Viora; Giuseppe Rizzo
Journal:  Am J Obstet Gynecol       Date:  2017-01-06       Impact factor: 8.661

3.  Birth weight in live births and stillbirths.

Authors:  L C Y Poon; M Y Tan; G Yerlikaya; A Syngelaki; K H Nicolaides
Journal:  Ultrasound Obstet Gynecol       Date:  2016-11       Impact factor: 7.299

4.  Toward safe standards for assessment of fetal growth in twin pregnancy.

Authors:  Jason Gardosi
Journal:  Am J Obstet Gynecol       Date:  2017-05       Impact factor: 8.661

Review 5.  The hypertensive disorders of pregnancy: ISSHP classification, diagnosis & management recommendations for international practice.

Authors:  Mark A Brown; Laura A Magee; Louise C Kenny; S Ananth Karumanchi; Fergus P McCarthy; Shigeru Saito; David R Hall; Charlotte E Warren; Gloria Adoyi; Salisu Ishaku
Journal:  Pregnancy Hypertens       Date:  2018-05-24       Impact factor: 2.899

6.  Fetal Medicine Foundation fetal and neonatal population weight charts.

Authors:  K H Nicolaides; D Wright; A Syngelaki; A Wright; R Akolekar
Journal:  Ultrasound Obstet Gynecol       Date:  2018-05-30       Impact factor: 7.299

7.  Estimated energy requirements increase across pregnancy in healthy women with dichorionic twins.

Authors:  Manisha Gandhi; Rajshi Gandhi; Lauren M Mack; Roman Shypailo; Anne L Adolph; Maurice R Puyau; William W Wong; Russell L Deter; Haleh Sangi-Haghpeykar; Wesley Lee; Nancy F Butte
Journal:  Am J Clin Nutr       Date:  2018-10-01       Impact factor: 7.045

8.  Patterns of Second- and Third-Trimester Growth and Discordance in Twin Pregnancy: Analysis of the Southwest Thames Obstetric Research Collaborative (STORK) Multiple Pregnancy Cohort.

Authors:  Oliver T Stirrup; Asma Khalil; Francesco D'Antonio; Baskaran Thilaganathan
Journal:  Fetal Diagn Ther       Date:  2016-09-14       Impact factor: 2.587

9.  Fetal growth reference ranges in twin pregnancy: analysis of the Southwest Thames Obstetric Research Collaborative (STORK) multiple pregnancy cohort.

Authors:  O T Stirrup; A Khalil; F D'Antonio; B Thilaganathan
Journal:  Ultrasound Obstet Gynecol       Date:  2014-08-25       Impact factor: 7.299

View more
  1 in total

1.  Should singleton birth weight standards be applied to identify small-for-gestational age twins?: analysis of a retrospective cohort study.

Authors:  Dongxin Lin; Jiaming Rao; Dazhi Fan; Zheng Huang; Zixing Zhou; Gengdong Chen; Pengsheng Li; Xiafen Lu; Demei Lu; Huishan Zhang; Caihong Luo; Xiaoling Guo; Zhengping Liu
Journal:  BMC Pregnancy Childbirth       Date:  2021-06-25       Impact factor: 3.007

  1 in total

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.