Evaluation methods for intrauterine growth using neonatal fat stores instead of birth weight as outcome measures: Fetal and neonatal measurements correlated with neonatal skinfold thicknesses

Abstract

Neonatal anthropometry, including timed skinfold measurements, was performed on 55 products of selected pregnancies. These skinfold measurements were compared with published standards of measurements obtained by similar techniques. Values outside the 3rd percentile to 97th percentile range were overlaid on the birth weight/menstrual age relationship of these subjects. Seven of 10 subjects with the lowest midtriceps skinfolds weighed more than 2500 g at birth (2 more than 3500 g) and 2 of 4 with the largest midtriceps skinfold had birth weights less than 4000 g. This comparison emphasizes the imprecision of birth weight as a measure of quality of fetal growth. Since skinfold thickness measurement is cumbersome for clinical use, other neonatal measures that may be more readily available to the clinician were examined for correlation with skinfolds. Simple birth weight/crown-heel length ratio was found to have the closest relationship of the parameters examined. Although estimated fetal weight was found to be the ultrasonography-derived parameter best correlated with skinfold thickness, ultrasonography discriminated poorly between babies with normal and low skinfolds. Low skinfold thickness predicted thermal vulnerability in the nursery better than did birth weight.

Gender differences in neonatal subcutaneous fat store in late gestation in relation to maternal weight gain

“…For instance, half of infants with low skinfold thickness measurements have an appropriate birth weight for their gestational age (Owen 1997), demonstratin g that birth weight is less able to detect cases of malnutrition than skinfold thickness. Neonatal subcutaneous fat store is also a better predictor of newborn outcome than birth weight: low skinfold thickness at birth predicts neonatal thermal vulnerability better than did birth weight (Sumners, Findley and Ferguson 1990). Furthermore, neonates with low skinfold thickness in relation to birth weight have lower plasma glucose levels (Oakley and Parsons 1977).…”

Subcutaneous fat stores related to weight in full-term neonates

“…Owen et al (2002) found that half of newborns with a suitable weight for their GA had low skinfold thickness (SK) values. The SK measurements have been more closely related to early metabolic alterations and neonatal evolution than to weight (Sumners et al 1990;Oakley and Parsons 1977). Therefore, the SK measurement has been proposed to provide more accurate information on fetal nutrition than simple weight (Sumners et al 1990).…”

“…The SK measurements have been more closely related to early metabolic alterations and neonatal evolution than to weight (Sumners et al 1990;Oakley and Parsons 1977). Therefore, the SK measurement has been proposed to provide more accurate information on fetal nutrition than simple weight (Sumners et al 1990). This is a simple method to assess the neonatal subcutaneous fat stores, and this method has been validated in newborns (Schmelzle and Fusch 2002).…”

Maternal and infant factors associated with neonatal adiposity: Results from the Tasmanian Infant Health Survey (TIHS)

“…In addition to providing more accurate information on fetal nutrition than simple weight, skinfold thickness measurements are widely used in the assessment of nutritional status throughout the life course, and offer a fast and non-invasive method of examining body fat mass particularly in newborns. 9,10 A study by Catalano et al 11 that examined 188 singleton term neonates showed that neonatal fat mass constitutes 14% of total birth weight but, explains nearly half of the variance in normal birth weight. Clearly, birth weight cannot be taken as a full proxy marker for neonatal adiposity, and a better understanding of the determinants of adiposity is required.…”