Routine ultrasound at 32 vs 36 weeks' gestation: prediction of small-for-gestational-age neonates

被引:51
作者
Ciobanu, A. [1 ]
Khan, N. [2 ,3 ]
Syngelaki, A. [1 ]
Akolekar, R. [2 ,3 ]
Nicolaides, K. H. [1 ]
机构
[1] Kings Coll Hosp London, Fetal Med Res Inst, 16-20 Windsor Walk,Denmark Hill, London SE5 8BB, England
[2] Medway Maritime Hosp, Fetal Med Unit, Gillingham, England
[3] Canterbury Christ Church Univ, Inst Med Sci, Chatham, Kent, England
关键词
adverse perinatal outcome; estimated fetal weight; fetal biometry; pyramid of pregnancy care; small-for-gestational age; symphysis-fundus height; third-trimester screening; FETAL-GROWTH RESTRICTION; BIRTH-WEIGHT; 3RD TRIMESTER; BIOMETRY; RISK; MANAGEMENT;
D O I
10.1002/uog.20258
中图分类号
O42 [声学];
学科分类号
070206 ; 082403 ;
摘要
Objective To evaluate and compare the performance of routine ultrasonographic estimated fetal weight (EFW) and fetal abdominal circumference (AC) at 31+0 to 33+6 and 35+0 to 36+6 weeks' gestation in the prediction of a small-for-gestational-age (SGA) neonate. Methods This was a prospective study of 21 989 singleton pregnancies undergoing routine ultrasound examination at 31+0 to 33+6 weeks' gestation and 45 847 undergoing routine ultrasound examination at 35+0 to 36+6 weeks' gestation. In each case, the estimated fetal weight (EFW) from measurements of fetal head circumference, AC and femur length was calculated using the Hadlock formula and expressed as a percentile according to The Fetal Medicine Foundation fetal and neonatal population weight charts. The same charts were used for defining a SGA neonate with birth weight <10th and <3rd percentiles. For each gestational-age window, the screen-positive and detection rates, at different EFW percentile cut-offs between the 10th and 50th percentiles, were calculated for prediction of delivery of a SGA neonate with birth weight <10th and <3rd percentiles within 2 weeks and at any stage after assessment. The areas under the receiver-operating characteristics curves (AUC) in screening for a SGA neonate by EFW and AC at 31+0 to 33+6 and at 35+0 to 36+6 weeks' gestation were compared. Results First, the AUCs in screening by EFW for a SGA neonate with birth weight <10th and <3rd percentiles delivered within 2 weeks and at any stage after screening at 35+0 to 36+6 weeks' gestation were significantly higher than those at 31+0 to 33+6 weeks (P<0.001). Second, at both 35+0 to 36+6 and 31+0 to 33+6 weeks' gestation, the predictive performance for a SGA neonate with birth weight <10th and <3rd percentiles born at any stage after screening was significantly higher using EFW Z-score than AC Z-score. Similarly, at 35+0 to 36+6 weeks, but not at 31+0 to 33+6 weeks, the predictive performance for a SGA neonate with birth weight <10th and <3rd percentiles born within 2 weeks after screening was significantly higher using EFW Z-score than AC Z-score. Third, screening by EFW <10th percentile at 35+0 to 36+6 weeks' gestation predicted 70% and 84% of neonates with birth weight <10th and <3rd percentiles, respectively, born within 2 weeks after assessment, and the respective values for a neonate born at any stage after assessment were 46% and 65%. Fourth, prediction of >85% of SGA neonates with birth weight <10th percentile born at any stage after screening at 35+0 to 36+6 weeks' gestation requires use of EFW <40th percentile. Screening at this percentile cut-off predicted 95% and 99% of neonates with birth weight <10th and <3rd percentiles, respectively, born within 2 weeks after assessment, and the respective values for a neonate born at any stage after assessment were 87% and 94%. Conclusions The predictive performance for a SGA neonate of routine ultrasonographic examination during the third trimester is higher if, first, the scan is carried out at 35+0 to 36+6 weeks' gestation than at 31+0 to 33+6 weeks, second, the method of screening is EFW than fetal AC, third, the outcome measure is birth weight<3rd than <10th percentile, and, fourth, if delivery occurs within 2 weeks than at any stage after assessment. Prediction of a SGA neonate by EFW <10th percentile is modest and prediction of >85% of cases at 35+0 to 36+6 weeks' gestation necessitates use of EFW <40th percentile. Copyright (c) 2019 ISUOG. Published by John Wiley & Sons Ltd.
引用
收藏
页码:761 / 768
页数:8
相关论文
共 50 条
  • [31] Prediction of small-for-gestational-age neonates: screening by uterine artery Doppler and mean arterial pressure at 19-24 weeks
    Lesmes, C.
    Gallo, D. M.
    Saiid, Y.
    Poon, L. C.
    Nicolaides, K. H.
    ULTRASOUND IN OBSTETRICS & GYNECOLOGY, 2015, 46 (03) : 332 - 340
  • [32] Severity of small-for-gestational-age and morbidity and mortality among very preterm neonates
    Minor, Kathleen C.
    Bianco, Katherine
    Sie, Lillian
    Druzin, Maurice L.
    Lee, Henry C.
    Leonard, Stephanie A.
    JOURNAL OF PERINATOLOGY, 2023, 43 (04) : 437 - 444
  • [33] Ultrasound screening for fetal growth restriction at 36 vs 32 weeks' gestation: a randomized trial (ROUTE)
    Roma, E.
    Arnau, A.
    Berdala, R.
    Bergos, C.
    Montesinos, J.
    Figueras, F.
    ULTRASOUND IN OBSTETRICS & GYNECOLOGY, 2015, 46 (04) : 391 - 397
  • [34] Competing-risks model for prediction of small-forgestational-age neonate at 36 weeks' gestation
    Papastefanou, I
    Thanopoulou, V
    Dimopoulou, S.
    Syngelaki, A.
    Akolekar, R.
    Nicolaides, K. H.
    ULTRASOUND IN OBSTETRICS & GYNECOLOGY, 2022, 60 (05) : 612 - 619
  • [35] Detection and clinical outcome of small-for-gestational-age fetuses in the third trimester-A comparison between routine ultrasound examination and examination on indication
    Bonnevier, Anna
    Marsal, Karel
    Kallen, Karin
    ACTA OBSTETRICIA ET GYNECOLOGICA SCANDINAVICA, 2022, 101 (01) : 102 - 110
  • [36] Competing-risks model for prediction of small-for-gestational-age neonate from biophysical and biochemical markers at 11-13 weeks' gestation
    Papastefanou, I.
    Wright, D.
    Syngelaki, A.
    Souretis, K.
    Chrysanthopoulou, E.
    Nicolaides, K. H.
    ULTRASOUND IN OBSTETRICS & GYNECOLOGY, 2021, 57 (01) : 52 - 61
  • [37] Antenatal Corticosteroids and Outcomes of Small-for-Gestational-Age Neonates
    Melamed, Nir
    Pittini, Alex
    Barrett, Jon
    Shah, Jyotsna
    Yoon, Eugene W.
    Lemyre, Brigitte
    Lee, Shoo K.
    Murphy, Kellie E.
    Shah, Prakesh S.
    OBSTETRICS AND GYNECOLOGY, 2016, 128 (05) : 1001 - 1008
  • [38] Competing-risks model for prediction of small-for-gestational-age neonate from estimated fetal weight at 19-24 weeks' gestation
    Papastefanou, I.
    Nowacka, U.
    Syngelaki, A.
    Dragoi, V.
    Karamanis, G.
    Wright, D.
    Nicolaides, K. H.
    ULTRASOUND IN OBSTETRICS & GYNECOLOGY, 2021, 57 (06) : 917 - 924
  • [39] Growth trajectory of preterm small-for-gestational-age neonates
    Molony, Claire L.
    Hiscock, Richard
    Kaufman, Jonathan
    Keenan, Emerson
    Hastie, Roxanne
    Brownfoot, Fiona C.
    JOURNAL OF MATERNAL-FETAL & NEONATAL MEDICINE, 2022, 35 (25) : 8400 - 8406
  • [40] A Systematic Review of Placental Biomarkers Predicting Small-for-Gestational-Age Neonates
    Ruchob, Rungnapa
    Rutherford, Julienne N.
    Bell, Aleeca F.
    BIOLOGICAL RESEARCH FOR NURSING, 2018, 20 (03) : 272 - 283