Prospective Comparative Evaluation of Performance of Fetal Growth Charts in the Diagnosis of Suboptimal Fetal Growth Dur
- PDF / 250,704 Bytes
- 8 Pages / 595.276 x 790.866 pts Page_size
- 18 Downloads / 142 Views
ORIGINAL ARTICLE
Prospective Comparative Evaluation of Performance of Fetal Growth Charts in the Diagnosis of Suboptimal Fetal Growth During Third Trimester Ultrasound Examination in an Unselected South Indian Antenatal Population Seneesh Kumar Vikraman1,3
•
Rinshi Abid Elayedatt2
Received: 31 October 2019 / Accepted: 1 February 2020 Ó Society of Fetal Medicine 2020
Abstract Growth standards are key tools in assigning fetal smallness. Growth charts are central to this. The availability of growth charts with varying conceptual methodology and design makes their comparison imperative to ensure wise clinical decision making. This was a prospective, descriptive and correlational study performed at two fetal medicine centers, on 1019 unselected third trimester South Indian women with singleton pregnancies. The estimated fetal weight (EFW) was calculated from one dataset per woman using the Hadlock III formula. The EFW centiles were obtained from eight prenatal growth charts: Hadlock, FMF, Spanish, INTERGROWTH, WHO, NICHD, Mikolajczyk and GROW (fully customized), and categorized to B 5th, 5.1 to B 10th, 10.1–89.9th and C 90 centiles. Comparison was done with similar categories of neonatal birthweight centiles obtained from Fenton, INTERGROWTH and GROW customized neonatal standards. At EFW cut-off of B 10th centile, the sensitivity range of the fetal growth charts were between 9.5 and 60% and the false positive rates (FPR) between 1.9 and 18.38%. Similar figures for EFW B 5th centile, were 9.5–64.2%
Electronic supplementary material The online version of this article (https://doi.org/10.1007/s40556-020-00244-9) contains supplementary material, which is available to authorized users. & Seneesh Kumar Vikraman [email protected] 1
Department of Maternal-Fetal Medicine, ARMC AEGIS Hospital Perinthalmana and Almas Hospital, Malappuram, Kerala 679322, India
2
Department of Maternal-Fetal Medicine, Nahas Hospital, Malappuram, Kerala 679111, India
3
Lakshmi Bhavan, Pallipuram P.O., Via Pattambi, Palakkad, Kerala 679305, India
and 1.0–12.8%, respectively. The INTERGROWTH chart had the highest positive predictive value of 54.6–63.6%. The FMF chart had the highest sensitivity and the highest FPR. The sensitivity, at a cut-off of B 5th centile, of Mikolajczyk (9.5–12.6%), and the GROW (14.4–18.9%) prenatal charts were closest to the incidence of uteroplacental insufficiency (7.9%) in our study. Wide variations noted in the performance of prenatal and neonatal growth charts in detecting fetal-neonatal smallness indicates the need for critical selection of growth charts and possibly additional supportive information in clinical decision making. Keywords Fetal growth charts Fetal growth standards Small for gestational age Fetal growth restriction Third trimester fetal ultrasound Hadlock Intergrowth GROW Neonatal growth standards
Introduction Assessment of the normal fetal growth trajectory and the early identification of its pathological deviations, constitutes one of the cardinal objectives of prenatal c
Data Loading...
