Two‐dimensional fetal biometry versus three‐dimensional fractional thigh volume for ultrasonographic prediction of birthweight

Abstract

Objective To develop and validate birthweight prediction models using fetal fractional thigh volume (TVol) in an Indian population, comparing them with existing prediction models developed for other ethnicities. Methods A prospective observational study was conducted among 131 pregnant women (>36 weeks) attending a tertiary hospital in New Delhi, India, for prenatal care between December 1, 2014, and November 1, 2016. Participants were randomly divided into formulating (n=100) and validation (n=31) groups. Multiple regression analysis was performed to generate four models to predict birthweight using various combinations of two‐dimensional (2D) ultrasonographic parameters and a three‐dimensional (3D) ultrasonographic parameter (TVol). The best fit model was compared with previously published 2D and 3D models. Results The best fit model comprised biparietal diameter, head circumference, abdominal circumference, and TVol. This model had the lowest mean percentage error (0.624 ± 8.075) and the highest coefficient of determination (R2=0.660). It correctly predicted 70.2% and 91.6% of birthweights within 5% and 10% of actual weight, respectively. Compared with previous models, attributability for the 2D and 3D models was 0.65 and 0.55, respectively. Accuracy was −0.05 ± 1.007 and −2.54 ± 1.11, respectively. Conclusion Models that included TVol provided good prediction of birthweight in the target population.

Fetal weight estimation by automated three-dimensional limb volume model in late third trimester compared to two-dimensional model: a cross-sectional prospective observational study

“…In most previous studies, the primary limitation of using 3D ultrasound to measure fetal limb volume was to manually trace the limb boundaries of the ve cross-sections [10][11][12][13]15], which is time consuming and leads to limited clinical application. The 5D limb vol software in this study uses computer-aided measurement technology, which can automatically trace the boundary of the limb in cross-sections to obtain fetal limb volume and estimated fetal weight, and manual adjustment can be conducted if needed.…”

“…Previous studies have shown that fractional limb volume combined with other 2D biological indicators can improve the precision of fetal weight estimation [11][12][13][14][15]. The recently launched automated software tool (5D Limb Vol) can automatically measure the fractional limb volume of the fetus approximately ve times faster than manual tracing [16].…”

Does the measurement of the size of the first trimester subchorionic hematoma by 2D and 3D ultrasonographic techniques have any effect on adverse pregnancy outcomes?

“…The use of 3D technology has been increasing in recent years. Sharma et al [25] compared the estimation of fetal weights measured both by 2D and 3D technologies and observed that the 3D method was more accurate. Becsek et al [26] reported a more accurate measurement of CRL by 3D technique when compared to the 2D approach.…”

Comparison between clinical estimated fetal weights (CEFW) Versus Ultrasonographic estimated fetal weight (UEFW) for co-relation with actual birth weight (ABW) in 3rd Trimester of Pregnancy

“…In the higher range of birth weight (greater than 4000 g), Both methods have similar accuracy (23). Correlation between CEFW and ABW (r = 0.074) was insignificant and was almost showed no relationship while a significant correlation between UEFW and ABW (r = 0.782) (5). But another study reported that the correlation coefficient for the CEFW was 0.78 and UEFW was 0.74 and it was statistically demonstrated that both showed significant positive correlation (p<0.001) (6).…”