Longitudinal reference charts for growth of the fetal head, abdomen and femur

Johnsen, Synnøve Lian; Wilsgaard, Tom; Rasmussen, Svein; Sollien, Rita; Kiserud, Torvid

doi:10.1016/j.ejogrb.2005.10.004

Cited by 87 publications

(100 citation statements)

References 26 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Unclassified

Order By: Relevance

“…Therefore, birthweight references would substantially under-diagnose SGA infants in preterm births. [9][10][11] Yet, ultrasound-based fetal-weight references were mostly developed in white women from Europe or North America, [12][13][14][15] which might not be applicable to the ethnic groups living in most developing countries.…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Application of A global reference for fetal‐weight and birthweight percentiles in predicting infant mortality

Ding

Tian

Zhang

et al. 2013

BJOG

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Objective To determine whether the recently published A global reference for fetal-weight and birthweight percentiles (Global Reference) improves small-(SGA), appropriate-(AGA), and large-for-gestational-age (LGA) definitions in predicting infant mortality.Design Population-based cohort study. Population Singleton births with birthweight >500 g born at 24-41 weeks of gestation.Methods We compared infant mortality rates of SGA, AGA, and LGA infants classified by three different references: the Global Reference; a commonly used birthweight reference; and Hadlock's ultrasound reference.Main outcome measures Infant mortality rates.Results Among 33 997 719 eligible liveborn singleton births, 25% of preterm and 9% of term infants were classified differently for SGA, AGA, and LGA by the Global Reference and the birthweight reference. The Global Reference indicated higher mortality rates in preterm SGA and preterm LGA infants than the birthweight reference. The mortality rate was considerably higher in infants classified as preterm SGA by the Global Reference but not by the birthweight reference, compared with the corresponding infants classified by the birthweight reference but not by the Global Reference (105.7 versus 12.9 per 1000, RR 8.17, 95% CI 7.38-9.06). Yet, the differences in mortality rates were much smaller in term infants than in preterm infants. Black infants had a particularly higher mortality rate than other races in AGA and LGA preterm and term infants.Conclusions In respect to the commonly used birthweight reference, the Global Reference increases the identification of infant deaths by improved classification of abnormal newborn size at birth, and these advantages were more obvious in preterm than in term infants.

show abstract

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Application of A global reference for fetal‐weight and birthweight percentiles in predicting infant mortality

Ding

Tian

Zhang

et al. 2013

BJOG

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…En rekke ulike faktorer som mors høyde, paritet, røy-king, etnisk bakgrunn og fosterets kjønn er vist å gjenspeiles i fosterets vekst (18,22,28,29). Noen av disse faktorene er fysiologiske (kjønn, paritet), mens andre er patologiske (røyking) med varierende grad av overlapping (maternell vekt).…”

Section: Tilpassede Referanseverdier (Customised Reference Ranges)unclassified

“…Noen av disse faktorene er fysiologiske (kjønn, paritet), mens andre er patologiske (røyking) med varierende grad av overlapping (maternell vekt). Det er utviklet modeller for fostervekt som inkorporerer maternelle og føtale faktorer (18,22,30,31), og flere studier har vist at slike individuelt justerte standarder bedre predikerer negativt svangerskapsutfall enn ujusterte standarder, samtidig som de reduserer antall falsk positive veksthemmede (32)(33)(34). En innvending mot en slik tilpassing er at man ved å korrigere for mulige suboptimale forhold hos mor, for eksempel lav vekt pga.…”

Section: Tilpassede Referanseverdier (Customised Reference Ranges)unclassified

“…Videre studier er nødvendig for å klargjøre hvilke metoder som er best, hvordan de skal anvendes, eventuelt kombineres, og hvordan de kan forbedres. Vi har i dag dokumenterte praktiske metoder i Norge til å beregne både betinget vekst og størrelse justert for ulike faktorer (18,22). Ved overvåking av risikosvangerskap anbefales å bruke en slik målrettet metode som klart bedre identifiserer veksthemming og fostre med negative svangerskapsutfall enn en utilpasset enkeltmåling.…”

Section: Diskusjon Og Oppsummeringunclassified

See 1 more Smart Citation

Untitled

Johnsen¹,

Kiserud²

2009

Nor J Epidemiol

Self Cite

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Korrespondanse: Synnøve Lian Johnsen, e-post: synnove.johnsen@helse-bergen.no Telefon: 55974200 Telefax: 55297412 SAMMENDRAGUltralyd billeddanning er i dag den beste undersøkelsesmetoden vi har til å overvåke fosterets utvikling og vekst. Ultralydmåling av fosterets størrelse og biometriske referansetabeller for svangerskapet brukes til å fastsette svangerskapets alder, beregne termin og vurdere fosterets vekst. Optimal studiedesign er ulik for hvert av disse formålene. Det er stor variasjon i fysiologisk vekst og en utfordring å identifisere fostre som har dårlig tilvekst. En enkeltmåling av fosteret kan fortelle oss om det er lite eller stort i forhold til andre fostre, men ikke om størrelsen er passelig i forhold til forventet fysiologisk vekst for dette fosteret. Tilpassede referansemodeller ("customised") justerer forventet størrelse i relasjon til føtale og maternelle faktorer og har vist seg å bedre identifisere sanne veksthemmede fostre enn bare å klassifisere i henhold til 2,5, 5 eller 10 persentilen. Men et foster som i utgangspunktet er stort for alderen, men etter hvert vokser langsomt vil ikke nødvendigvis bli fanget opp ved en slik enkeltmåling. Serielle målinger vil hjelpe, men en slik longitudinell metode blir ikke fullt ut utnyttet før det appliseres betinget ("conditional") vekstberegning. Betingelsesleddene for variasjon i vekst og målemetode kalkuleres ut fra longitudinelle data og kan så anvendes for det enkelte foster. En første måling brukes til å beregne forventet vekst og variasjon for en neste måling. Denne metoden forventes å skjerpe diagnostikken for vekst-avvik i alle vektklasser og kan sammen med tilpasningen av andre faktorer bedre overvåkningen av risikosvangerskap. ENGLISH SUMMARYUltrasonographic imaging is today the best method for assessing fetal size and monitoring fetal growth. Ultrasound measurements of fetal size are used for age, size and growth assessment, but the statistical design and analysis are different for each of these purposes. Physiological ranges for fetal growth are wide and the identification of fetal growth-restriction is correspondingly challenging. While fetal growth is reflected in various morphometric measurements, it is the estimated fetal weight (EFW) that has become the most useful method of identifying the growth-restricted fetuses. EFW is typically classified using populationbased percentiles. The most common definition of fetal growth-restriction refers to a weight below the 2.5 th , 5 th or 10 th percentile for gestational age. This definition is controversial because it does not make a distinction between constitutionally small, small and growth-restricted, or growth-restricted but not small fetuses. Multiple variables affect fetal weight and can be incorporated into individually adjusted percentiles (e.g. fetal gender and maternal parity, ethnicity, height, weight, and age). Such customised fetal weight percentiles seem to enhance the identification of fetuses at risk of perinatal death and morbidity. A further advancement of the method is the ...

show abstract

“…They all use the skull circumference as the main measurement of head growth, not the actual brain size and its different parameters (15)(16)(17). The sonographic prenatal diagnosis of microcephaly is challenging, since US has a relatively low sensitivity and specificity in detecting prenatal microcephaly (5,(18)(19)(20)(21).…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Discrepancy in fetal head biometry between ultrasound and MRI in suspected microcephalic fetuses

et al. 2017

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Background: Microcephaly is one of the most common fetal structural abnormalities, and prenatal microcephaly is considered a group I malformation of cortical development diagnosed according to ultrasound (US) skull measurements. Purpose: To evaluate the agreement between fetal head US and magnetic resonance imaging (MRI) biometric measurements of suspected microcephalic fetuses. Material and Methods: This institutional review board-approved retrospective study with waived informed consent included 180 pregnant women and was conducted at our medical center from March 2011 to April 2013. Biparietal diameter (BPD) and occipitofrontal diameter (OFD) results of fetal head US normograms were compared to normograms for MRI. We used Pearson and Spearman rho non-parametric correlation coefficients to assess the association between two quantitative variables, paired t-test for paired quantitative variables, and McNemar test for paired qualitative variables. Results: The average BPD but not the average OFD percentiles in fetal head US differed significantly from the MRI results (P < 0.0001). When looking at the accepted microcephaly threshold, both BPD and OFD percentiles differed significantly from MRI (P < 0.0001 and P < 0.004, respectively). There was no correlation between US-measured skull biometry and MRI-measured brain biometry. Estimated cerebrospinal fluid volumes were significantly lower in the study group compared to 120 fetuses with normal findings in prenatal head US and MRI. Also, we have created a MRI-based normogram of fetal head circumference and gestational age.

show abstract

Longitudinal reference charts for growth of the fetal head, abdomen and femur

Cited by 87 publications

References 26 publications

Application of A global reference for fetal‐weight and birthweight percentiles in predicting infant mortality

Application of A global reference for fetal‐weight and birthweight percentiles in predicting infant mortality

Untitled

Discrepancy in fetal head biometry between ultrasound and MRI in suspected microcephalic fetuses

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About