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?

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.

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

“…which the proportions below the 10 th centile were far lower than 10% [17]. AC and FL discrepancies between French and INTERGROWTH-21 st centiles were also demonstrated using a very large sample of low-risk pregnancies belonging to the French Elfe cohort [35]. Similar results were published by Cheng et al, who showed large differences between the INTER-GROWTH-21 st standards and the Chinese biometry standards using data collected on more than 10,000 unselected pregnancies.…”

Fetal biometry assessment with Intergrowth 21st’s and Salomon’s equations in rural Burkina Faso

“…Our study population prone to malaria was quite selected and this maybe introduce a bias. However, a recent study showed that the difference between the two charts remained while using fetal biometric measurements from pregnant women as healthy as those in the Intergrowth 21st study [43].…”

The French Pregnancy Cohort: Medication use during pregnancy in the French population

“…Women were treated and followed prospectively as part of the usual health care management in France before, during and after pregnancy. In France, once having a positive pregnancy test, the woman may be checked with the same gynecologist throughout her pregnancy, including 3 ultrasound scans (1 st at 12 weeks, 2 nd at 22–24 weeks, and 3 rd at 30–35 weeks of pregnancy, respectively) [16–19]. Specifically, from the EGB, we selected data on all the variables that characterized a pregnant woman (age, insurance, government financial support, geographic code) as well as the variables that described the physician visits (date in day/month/year, prescriber, diagnosis, procedure).…”