Prenatal prediction of adverse outcome using different charts and definitions of fetal growth restriction

被引:6
|
作者
Mascherpa, M. [1 ,2 ]
Pegoire, C. [1 ]
Meroni, A. [1 ,3 ]
Minopoli, M. [1 ,4 ]
Thilaganathan, B. [1 ,5 ]
Frick, A. [1 ]
Bhide, A. [1 ,6 ]
机构
[1] Univ London, St Georges Univ Hosp NHS Fdn Trust, Fetal Med Unit, London, England
[2] Univ Brescia, Dept Med & Surg, Obstet & Gynaecol Unit, Brescia, Italy
[3] Univ Pavia, Dept Med & Surg, Obstet & Gynaecol Unit, Pavia, Italy
[4] Univ Study Parma, Dept Med & Surg, Obstet & Gynaecol Unit, Parma, Italy
[5] St Georges Univ London, Mol & Clin Sci Res Inst, Vasc Biol Res Ctr, London, England
[6] St Georges Univ Hosp NHS Fdn Trust, Dept Obstet & Gynaecol, Fetal Med Unit, Blackshaw Rd, London SW17 0QT, England
关键词
adverse outcome; Doppler; fetal growth restriction; growth chart; prenatal diagnosis; small-for-gestational age; ultrasonography; FOR-GESTATIONAL-AGE; REFERENCE RANGES; WEIGHT; MANAGEMENT; STANDARDS; DIAGNOSIS;
D O I
10.1002/uog.27568
中图分类号
O42 [声学];
学科分类号
070206 ; 082403 ;
摘要
Objective Antenatal growth assessment using ultrasound aims to identify small fetuses that are at higher risk of perinatal morbidity and mortality. This study explored whether the association between suboptimal fetal growth and adverse perinatal outcome varies with different definitions of fetal growth restriction (FGR) and different weight charts/standards. Methods This was a retrospective cohort study of 17 261 singleton non-anomalous pregnancies at >= 24 + 0 weeks' gestation that underwent routine ultrasound at a tertiary referral hospital. Estimated fetal weight (EFW) and Doppler indices were converted into percentiles using a reference standard (INTERGROWTH-21(st) (IG-21)) and various reference charts (Hadlock, Fetal Medicine Foundation (FMF) and Swedish). Test characteristics were assessed using the consensus definition, Society for Maternal-Fetal Medicine (SMFM) definition and Swedish criteria for FGR. Adverse perinatal outcome was defined as perinatal death, admission to the neonatal intensive care unit at term, 5-min Apgar score < 7 and therapeutic cooling for neonatal encephalopathy. The association between FGR according to each definition and adverse perinatal outcome was compared. Multivariate logistic regression analysis was used to test the strength of association between ultrasound parameters and adverse perinatal outcome. Ultrasound parameters were also tested for correlation. Results IG-21, Hadlock and FMF fetal size references classified as growth-restricted 1.5%, 3.6% and 4.6% of fetuses, respectively, using the consensus definition and 2.9%, 8.8% and 10.6% of fetuses, respectively, using the SMFM definition. The sensitivity of the definition/chart combinations for adverse perinatal outcome varied from 4.4% (consensus definition with IG-21 charts) to 13.2% (SMFM definition with FMF charts). Specificity varied from 89.4% (SMFM definition with FMF charts) to 98.6% (consensus definition with IG-21 charts). The consensus definition and Swedish criteria showed the highest specificity, positive predictive value and positive likelihood ratio in detecting adverse outcome, irrespective of the reference chart/standard used. Conversely, the SMFM definition had the highest sensitivity across all investigated growth charts. Low EFW, abnormal mean uterine artery pulsatility index (UtA-PI) and abnormal cerebroplacental ratio were significantly associated with adverse perinatal outcome and there was a positive correlation between the covariates. Multivariate logistic regression showed that UtA-PI > 95(th) percentile and EFW < 5(th) percentile were the only parameters consistently associated with adverse outcome, irrespective of the definitions or fetal growth chart/standard used. Conclusions The apparent prevalence of FGR varies according to the definition and fetal size reference chart/standard used. Irrespective of the method of classification, the sensitivity for the identification of adverse perinatal outcome remains low. EFW, UtA-PI and fetal Doppler parameters are significant predictors of adverse perinatal outcome. As these indices are correlated with one other, a prediction algorithm is advocated to overcome the limitations of using these parameters in isolation. (c) 2023 The Authors. Ultrasound in Obstetrics & Gynecology published by John Wiley & Sons Ltd on behalf of International Society of Ultrasound in Obstetrics and Gynecology.
引用
收藏
页码:605 / 612
页数:8
相关论文
共 50 条
  • [21] Angiogenic factors vs. standard evaluation in the prediction of adverse outcome among pregnancies with suspected fetal growth restriction
    Beharier, Ofer
    Swissa, Shani
    Szaingurten-Solodkin, Irit
    Walfisch, Asnat
    Yaniv-Salem, Shimrt
    Pariente, Gali
    Novack, Victor
    Hershkovitz, Reli
    AMERICAN JOURNAL OF OBSTETRICS AND GYNECOLOGY, 2018, 218 (01) : S297 - S298
  • [22] All fetal growth restriction definitions fall short
    Mylrea-Foley, Bronacha
    Napolitano, Raffaele
    Gordijn, Sanne
    Wolf, Hans
    Stampalija, Tamara
    Lees, Christoph C.
    AMERICAN JOURNAL OF OBSTETRICS & GYNECOLOGY MFM, 2024, 6 (02)
  • [23] Diagnostic accuracy of fetal growth charts for placenta-related fetal growth restriction
    Melamed, Nir
    Hiersch, Liran
    Aviram, Amir
    Mei-Dan, Elad
    Keating, Sarah
    Kingdom, John C.
    PLACENTA, 2021, 105 : 70 - 77
  • [24] Is Prenatal Volumetric Evaluation of Aneurysm of the Vein of Galen Important in the Prediction of Adverse Fetal Outcome?
    Gun, Ismet
    Mungen, Ercument
    Kurdoglu, Mertihan
    Babacan, Ali
    Muhcu, Murat
    Atay, Vedat
    JOURNAL OF CLINICAL ULTRASOUND, 2010, 38 (08) : 443 - 445
  • [25] Detection rate of prenatal fetal growth restriction
    Gersak, Ksenija
    Hatije, Ismaili
    Kavsek, Gorazd
    ZDRAVNISKI VESTNIK-SLOVENIAN MEDICAL JOURNAL, 2010, 79 (10): : 690 - 697
  • [26] Re: Outcome-based comparison of SMFM and ISUOG definitions of fetal growth restriction Reply
    Roeckner, J. T.
    Pressman, K.
    Odibo, L.
    Duncan, J. R.
    Odibo, A. O.
    ULTRASOUND IN OBSTETRICS & GYNECOLOGY, 2021, 58 (03) : 494 - +
  • [27] Fetal doppler versus NST as predictors of adverse perinatal outcome in severe preeclampsia and fetal growth restriction
    Radhika, Padmagirison
    Lavanya, Rai
    JOURNAL OF OBSTETRICS AND GYNECOLOGY OF INDIA, 2006, 56 (02): : 134 - 138
  • [28] Fetal Growth Restriction and Neurodevelopmental Outcome
    Deepak Chawla
    Indian Journal of Pediatrics, 2021, 88 : 538 - 539
  • [29] Fetal Growth Restriction and Neurodevelopmental Outcome
    Chawla, Deepak
    INDIAN JOURNAL OF PEDIATRICS, 2021, 88 (06): : 538 - 539
  • [30] Can we predict adverse neonatal outcome in fetal growth restriction near term?
    Vergani, Patrizia
    Roncaglia, Nadia
    Ghidini, Alessandro
    Crippa, Isabella
    Andreotti, Camilla
    Sala, Francesca
    Pezzullo, John
    AMERICAN JOURNAL OF OBSTETRICS AND GYNECOLOGY, 2006, 195 (06) : S206 - S206