Finding the Best Formula to Predict the Fetal Weight: Comparison of 18 Formulas

Esinler, Deniz; Bircan, Oya; Esin, Sertaç; Şahin, Elif; Kandemir, Ömer; Yalvaç, Serdar

doi:10.1159/000365814

Cited by 30 publications

(32 citation statements)

References 24 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…(17) Additionally, at earlier gestational ages, small changes in measurements can result in large changes in growth percentiles. (9) Given the relative lack of clinical data in this context, clinicians may wonder if growth restriction at the time of ultrasound to assess fetal anatomy without an identifiable cause represents true pathology or measurement imprecision.…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Early Second-Trimester Fetal Growth Restriction and Adverse Perinatal Outcomes

Temming

Dicke

Stout

et al. 2017

Obstetrics &Amp; Gynecology

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Objective To estimate the risk of adverse perinatal outcomes among women with isolated fetal growth restriction from 17 to 22 weeks of gestation. Methods This was a retrospective cohort study of all singleton, non-anomalous pregnancies undergoing ultrasound to assess fetal anatomy between 17 and 22 weeks of gestation at a single center from 2010 to 2014. After excluding patients with fetal structural malformations, chromosomal abnormalities, or identified infection etiologies, we compared perinatal outcomes between pregnancies with and without fetal growth restriction, defined as estimated fetal weight <10th percentile for gestational age. Our primary outcome was small for gestational age (SGA) at birth, defined as birthweight < 10th percentile. Secondary outcomes included preterm delivery <37 weeks and <28 weeks, preeclampsia, abruption, stillbirth, neonatal death, neonatal intensive care unit (NICU) admission, intraventricular hemorrhage, need for respiratory support, and necrotizing enterocolitis. Results Of 12,783 eligible patients, 355 (2.8%) had early second-trimester fetal growth restriction. Risk factors for growth restriction were African American race and tobacco use. Early second-trimester growth restriction was associated with over a fivefold increase in risk of SGA at birth (36.9% vs 9.1%, aOR 5.5, 95% CI 4.3, 7.0), stillbirth (2.5% vs 0.4%, OR 6.2, 95% CI 2.7, 12.8), and neonatal death (1.4% vs 0.3%, OR 5.2, 95% CI 1.6, 13.5). Rates of indicated preterm birth <37 weeks (7.3% vs 3.3%, OR 2.3, 95% CI 1.5,3.5) and <28 weeks (2.5% vs 0.2%, OR 10.8, 95% CI 4.5,23.4), neonatal need for respiratory support (16.9% vs 7.8%, aOR 1.6, 95% CI 1.1,2.2), and necrotizing enterocolitis (1.4% vs 0.2%, OR 7.7, 95% CI 2.3, 20.9) were also significantly higher for those with growth restriction. Rates of preeclampsia, abruption, and other neonatal outcomes were not significantly different. Conclusion Although fetal growth restriction in the early second trimester occurred in less than 3% of our cohort and most of those with isolated growth restriction did not have adverse outcomes, it is a strong risk factor for SGA, stillbirth, neonatal death, and indicated preterm birth.

show abstract

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Early Second-Trimester Fetal Growth Restriction and Adverse Perinatal Outcomes

Temming

Dicke

Stout

et al. 2017

Obstetrics &Amp; Gynecology

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…Studies describing new models have often reported that their model was superior to previously published ones, but this is an inevitable consequence of deriving and testing a model in the same population. In general, previous studies assessing the accuracy of different models for EFW in the prediction of birth weight have reached the conclusion that either the most, or among the most, accurate models were those reported by Hadlock et al 15 in all pregnancies, including those with a small or large baby [50][51][52][53][54][55][56][57] .…”

Section: Comparison With Previous Studiesmentioning

confidence: 93%

Ultrasonographic estimation of fetal weight: development of new model and assessment of performance of previous models

Hammami

Zumaeta

Syngelaki

et al. 2018

Ultrasound in Obstet & Gyne

134

128

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

The most accurate models, with the lowest Euclidean distance and highest proportion of AE ≤ 10%, were provided by the formulae incorporating ≥ 3 rather than < 3 biometrical measurements. The systematic review identified 45 studies describing a total of 70 models for EFW by various combinations of measurements of fetal head circumference (HC), biparietal diameter, femur length (FL) and abdominal circumference (AC). The most accurate model with the lowest Euclidean distance and highest proportion of AE ≤ 10% was provided by the formula of Hadlock et al., published in 1985, which incorporated measurements of HC, AC and FL; there was a highly significant linear association between EFW and birth weight (r = 0.959; P < 0.0001), and EFW was within 10% of birth weight in 80% of cases. The performance of the best model developed in this study, utilizing HC, AC and FL, was very similar to that of Hadlock et al. CONCLUSION: Despite many efforts to develop new models for EFW, the one reported in 1985 by Hadlock et al., from measurements of HC, AC and FL, provides the most accurate prediction of birth weight and can be used for assessment of all babies, including those suspected to be either small or large. Copyright © 2018 ISUOG. Published by John Wiley & Sons Ltd.

show abstract

“…A Congolian study, the Singapore Chinese study and a UK study used the Hadlock formula involving AC, FL, BPD and HC (Hadlock (II)) instead [12,28,29]. Esinler et al compared different EFW algorithms and suggested that Hadlock (I) and Hadlock (II) had good and similar degree of accuracy [30]. Our study, the …”

Section: Comparison With Other Growth Standardsmentioning

confidence: 82%