2009
DOI: 10.1179/174313409x448543
|View full text |Cite
|
Sign up to set email alerts
|

Fetal Size and Dating: Charts Recommended for Clinical Obstetric Practice

Abstract: Technique CRL measurements can be carried out trans-abdominally or trans-vaginally. A midline sagittal section of the whole embryo

Help me understand this report

Search citation statements

Order By: Relevance

Paper Sections

Select...
4
1

Citation Types

3
172
1
6

Year Published

2011
2011
2021
2021

Publication Types

Select...
6

Relationship

0
6

Authors

Journals

citations
Cited by 175 publications
(186 citation statements)
references
References 5 publications
3
172
1
6
Order By: Relevance
“…14 73 79 84 91 98 104 112 15 92 100 106 115 123 132 142 16 116 125 134 144 155 166 179 17 145 156 167 179 193 206 222 18 179 193 206 222 239 255 275 19 219 236 252 272 293 313 337 20 267 287 307 330 356 380 410 21 322 347 370 399 429 459 494 22 385 415 443 477 514 549 591 23 457 492 526 566 610 651 Second, reliable data on last menstrual period were largely unavailable, which could lead to lower mean fetal weights by GA. 33,34 Third, late presentation to the prenatal clinic, a frequent occurrence in PNG, precluded pregnancy dating using CRL in most participants. Error margins of GA estimates based on fetal biometry increase with advancing GA, 15,19 and an episode of FGR before a dating measurement will underestimate GA, translating into lower fetal weight centiles. However, exclusion of pregnancies affected by severe maternal disease, congenital abnormalities, and stillbirth should have somewhat limited the number of fetuses that may have suffered early-onset FGR in this cohort.…”
Section: Discussionmentioning
confidence: 99%
See 4 more Smart Citations
“…14 73 79 84 91 98 104 112 15 92 100 106 115 123 132 142 16 116 125 134 144 155 166 179 17 145 156 167 179 193 206 222 18 179 193 206 222 239 255 275 19 219 236 252 272 293 313 337 20 267 287 307 330 356 380 410 21 322 347 370 399 429 459 494 22 385 415 443 477 514 549 591 23 457 492 526 566 610 651 Second, reliable data on last menstrual period were largely unavailable, which could lead to lower mean fetal weights by GA. 33,34 Third, late presentation to the prenatal clinic, a frequent occurrence in PNG, precluded pregnancy dating using CRL in most participants. Error margins of GA estimates based on fetal biometry increase with advancing GA, 15,19 and an episode of FGR before a dating measurement will underestimate GA, translating into lower fetal weight centiles. However, exclusion of pregnancies affected by severe maternal disease, congenital abnormalities, and stillbirth should have somewhat limited the number of fetuses that may have suffered early-onset FGR in this cohort.…”
Section: Discussionmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…16 In the second trimester, GA was estimated using the HC (FL if HC unavailable) until 24 GW + 6 days. 15 The biparietal diameter was not used for dating or growth assessments. 18 Measurements from enrollment scans were used to define GA.…”
Section: Methodsmentioning
confidence: 99%
See 3 more Smart Citations