Menstrual age-dependent systematic error in sonographic fetal weight estimation: A mathematical model

被引:9
作者
Mongelli, M [1 ]
Biswas, A [1 ]
机构
[1] Natl Univ Singapore Hosp, Dept Obstet & Gynecol, Singapore 119074, Singapore
关键词
fetus; fetal weight; ultrasonography;
D O I
10.1002/jcu.10051
中图分类号
O42 [声学];
学科分类号
070206 ; 082403 ;
摘要
Purpose. We used computer modeling techniques to evaluate the accuracy of different types of sonographic formulas for estimating fetal weight across the full range of clinically important menstrual ages. Methods. Input data for the computer modeling techniques were derived from published British standards for normal distributions of sonographic biometric growth parameters and their correlation coefficients; these standards had been derived from fetal populations whose ages were determined using sonography. The accuracy of each of 10 formulas for estimating fetal weight was calculated by comparing the weight estimates obtained with these formulas in simulated populations with the weight estimates expected from birth weight data, from 24 weeks menstrual age to term. Preterm weights were estimated by interpolation from term birth weights using sonographic growth curves. With an ideal formula, the median weight estimates at term should not differ from the population birth weight median. Results. The simulated output sonographic values closely matched those of the original population. The accuracy of the fetal weight estimation differed by menstrual age and between various formulas. Most methods tended to overestimate fetal weight at term. Shepard's formula progressively overestimated weights from about 2% at 32 weeks to more than 15% at term. The accuracy of Combs's and Shinozuka's volumetric formulas varied least by menstrual age. Hadlock's formula underestimated preterm fetal weight by up to 7% and overestimated fetal weight at term by up to 5%. Conclusions. The accuracy of sonographic fetal weight estimation based on volumetric formulas is more consistent across menstrual ages than are other methods. (C) 2002 Wiley Periodicals, Inc.
引用
收藏
页码:139 / 144
页数:6
相关论文
共 18 条
[1]   ULTRASONIC MEASUREMENT OF FETAL ABDOMEN CIRCUMFERENCE IN ESTIMATION OF FETAL WEIGHT [J].
CAMPBELL, S ;
WILKIN, D .
BRITISH JOURNAL OF OBSTETRICS AND GYNAECOLOGY, 1975, 82 (09) :689-697
[2]   Ultrasonographic estimate of birth weight at 24 to 34 weeks: A multicenter study [J].
Chauhan, SP ;
Charania, SF ;
McLaren, RK ;
Devoe, LD ;
Ross, EL ;
Hendrix, NW ;
Morrison, JC .
AMERICAN JOURNAL OF OBSTETRICS AND GYNECOLOGY, 1998, 179 (04) :909-916
[3]  
CHITTY LS, 1993, ULTRASOUND OBST GYN, P513
[4]  
COMBS CA, 1993, OBSTET GYNECOL, V82, P365
[5]   ESTIMATED FETAL WEIGHT IN THE DETECTION OF THE SMALL-FOR-MENSTRUAL-AGE FETUS [J].
DUDLEY, NJ ;
LAMB, MP ;
HATFIELD, JA ;
COPPING, C ;
SIDEBOTTOM, K .
JOURNAL OF CLINICAL ULTRASOUND, 1990, 18 (05) :387-393
[6]   INTRAUTERINE GROWTH-RETARDATION [J].
GARDOSI, JO ;
MONGELLI, JM ;
MUL, T .
BAILLIERES CLINICAL OBSTETRICS AND GYNAECOLOGY, 1995, 9 (03) :445-463
[7]   SONOGRAPHIC ESTIMATES OF FETAL WEIGHT IN THE INTRAUTERINE GROWTH-RETARDATION POPULATION [J].
GUIDETTI, DA ;
DIVON, MY ;
BRAVERMAN, JJ ;
LANGER, O ;
MERKATZ, IR .
AMERICAN JOURNAL OF PERINATOLOGY, 1990, 7 (01) :5-7
[8]   ESTIMATION OF FETAL WEIGHT WITH THE USE OF HEAD, BODY, AND FEMUR MEASUREMENTS - A PROSPECTIVE-STUDY [J].
HADLOCK, FP ;
HARRIST, RB ;
SHARMAN, RS ;
DETER, RL ;
PARK, SK .
AMERICAN JOURNAL OF OBSTETRICS AND GYNECOLOGY, 1985, 151 (03) :333-337
[9]   Gestation-adjusted projection of estimated fetal weight [J].
Mongelli, M ;
Gardosi, J .
ACTA OBSTETRICIA ET GYNECOLOGICA SCANDINAVICA, 1996, 75 (01) :28-31
[10]   Screening for fetal growth restriction: A mathematical model of the effect of time interval and ultrasound error [J].
Mongelli, M ;
Tambyrajia, R .
OBSTETRICS AND GYNECOLOGY, 1998, 92 (06) :908-912