Detection of Intrauterine Fetal Growth Retardation with Abdominal Circumference and Estimated Fetal Weight Using Cross‐Sectional Growth Curves

Abstract

The usefulness of a cross-sectional growth curve method in the detection of intrauterine growth retardation by ultrasonography was evaluated for abdominal circumference and estimated fetal weight. The patient sample consisted of 771 women with singleton pregnancy who delivered within seven days of an ultrasound scan. One hundred fifty-one (19.6%) women had infants with birth weight below the lOth percentile for menstrual age. Of these infants, 72.2% were symmetrically growth retarded on the basis of their neonatal ponderal index. The neonatal weight outcomes were correlated with the abdominal circumference and estimated fetal weight percentile values. Both measurements were more specific than sensitive and had much higher negative than positive predictive values. The sensitivity was influenced by menstrual age, and severity and type of intrauterine growth retardation. Overall, estimated fetal weight was more accurate than abdominal circumference, but the difference was too small to be clinically important. Both measurements were better suited to confirm than to detect, exclude, or predict intrauterine growth retardation. Normal results predicted a normal neonatal weight outcome with a very high probability when the prevalence of the condition was low. In spite of the limitations of the crosssectional method, both tests had strengths that can be advantageously used to enhance clinical decision making in the management of intrauterine growth retardation.

Preeclampsia and intrauterine growth restriction: Role of human umbilical cord mesenchymal stem cells-trophoblast cross-talk

“…IUGR: fetus with an estimated fetal weight < 10th percentile by ultrasound [17] and growth arrest or pathologic PI of uterine arteries.…”

Adverse Birth Outcomes in Relation to Prenatal Sonographic Measurements of Fetal Size

“…[11][12][13][14][15] Other studies have evaluated the association of IUGR diagnosed on the basis of sonography and LBW but not other adverse neonatal outcomes. [16][17][18] However, most of these reports were case-control studies, making it difficult to evaluate the predictive value of sonography. One study identified an association between sonographic EFW in the first trimester of pregnancy and birth weight, birth weight for GA, and prematurity.…”

A Comparison of Statistical Methods for Age-related Reference Intervals

“…Chinn (1992) made the same assumptions when analysing height for age, although she used a shifted log-transformation. In fetal medicine, it appears to be common (see for example Simon et al (1990) and Todros et al (1987)) to logtransform the response variable (e.g. birth weight) and to ®t a model of the form 0 1 T 2 T 3 where T is menstrual or gestational age.…”