Cargando…
Prenatal Application of the Individualized Fetal Growth Reference
The individualized reference for defining small for gestational age (SGA) at birth has gained popularity in recent years. However, its utility on fetal assessment has not been evaluated. The authors compare an individualized with an ultrasound reference in predicting poor perinatal outcomes. Data fr...
Autores principales: | , , , , |
---|---|
Formato: | Texto |
Lenguaje: | English |
Publicado: |
Oxford University Press
2011
|
Materias: | |
Acceso en línea: | https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC3044839/ https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/21252054 http://dx.doi.org/10.1093/aje/kwq411 |
_version_ | 1782198784378273792 |
---|---|
author | Zhang, Jun Mikolajczyk, Rafael Grewal, Jaceteshwar Neta, Gila Klebanoff, Mark |
author_facet | Zhang, Jun Mikolajczyk, Rafael Grewal, Jaceteshwar Neta, Gila Klebanoff, Mark |
author_sort | Zhang, Jun |
collection | PubMed |
description | The individualized reference for defining small for gestational age (SGA) at birth has gained popularity in recent years. However, its utility on fetal assessment has not been evaluated. The authors compare an individualized with an ultrasound reference in predicting poor perinatal outcomes. Data from a large clinical trial in predominantly white US women (1987–1991) with singleton pregnancies (n = 9,526) were used. The individualized reference classified fewer SGA fetuses than the ultrasound reference, but the risks of adverse outcomes were similar between fetuses classified by both references. The risk increased substantially only when the percentiles fell below the 5th percentile (likelihood ratio positive at birth = 2.68 (95% confidence interval (CI): 2.00, 3.58) and 3.13 (95% CI: 2.34, 4.18) for ultrasound and individualized references, respectively). SGA fetuses defined by either the individualized or ultrasound reference alone had risk ratios of adverse outcomes of 1.91 (95% CI: 0.77, 4.77) and 1.18 (95% CI: 0.37, 3.77), respectively, compared with normal fetuses (the difference between these 2 risk ratios, P = 0.71). The authors conclude that neither the ultrasound-based nor the individualized reference does well in predicting adverse perinatal outcomes. The 5th percentile may be a better cutpoint than the 10th percentile in defining SGA. |
format | Text |
id | pubmed-3044839 |
institution | National Center for Biotechnology Information |
language | English |
publishDate | 2011 |
publisher | Oxford University Press |
record_format | MEDLINE/PubMed |
spelling | pubmed-30448392011-02-28 Prenatal Application of the Individualized Fetal Growth Reference Zhang, Jun Mikolajczyk, Rafael Grewal, Jaceteshwar Neta, Gila Klebanoff, Mark Am J Epidemiol Practice of Epidemiology The individualized reference for defining small for gestational age (SGA) at birth has gained popularity in recent years. However, its utility on fetal assessment has not been evaluated. The authors compare an individualized with an ultrasound reference in predicting poor perinatal outcomes. Data from a large clinical trial in predominantly white US women (1987–1991) with singleton pregnancies (n = 9,526) were used. The individualized reference classified fewer SGA fetuses than the ultrasound reference, but the risks of adverse outcomes were similar between fetuses classified by both references. The risk increased substantially only when the percentiles fell below the 5th percentile (likelihood ratio positive at birth = 2.68 (95% confidence interval (CI): 2.00, 3.58) and 3.13 (95% CI: 2.34, 4.18) for ultrasound and individualized references, respectively). SGA fetuses defined by either the individualized or ultrasound reference alone had risk ratios of adverse outcomes of 1.91 (95% CI: 0.77, 4.77) and 1.18 (95% CI: 0.37, 3.77), respectively, compared with normal fetuses (the difference between these 2 risk ratios, P = 0.71). The authors conclude that neither the ultrasound-based nor the individualized reference does well in predicting adverse perinatal outcomes. The 5th percentile may be a better cutpoint than the 10th percentile in defining SGA. Oxford University Press 2011-03-01 2011-01-20 /pmc/articles/PMC3044839/ /pubmed/21252054 http://dx.doi.org/10.1093/aje/kwq411 Text en American Journal of Epidemiology Published by Oxford University Press on behalf of the Johns Hopkins Bloomberg School of Public Health 2011. This is an Open Access article distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution Non-Commercial License (http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc/2.5), which permits unrestricted non-commercial use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided the original work is properly cited. |
spellingShingle | Practice of Epidemiology Zhang, Jun Mikolajczyk, Rafael Grewal, Jaceteshwar Neta, Gila Klebanoff, Mark Prenatal Application of the Individualized Fetal Growth Reference |
title | Prenatal Application of the Individualized Fetal Growth Reference |
title_full | Prenatal Application of the Individualized Fetal Growth Reference |
title_fullStr | Prenatal Application of the Individualized Fetal Growth Reference |
title_full_unstemmed | Prenatal Application of the Individualized Fetal Growth Reference |
title_short | Prenatal Application of the Individualized Fetal Growth Reference |
title_sort | prenatal application of the individualized fetal growth reference |
topic | Practice of Epidemiology |
url | https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC3044839/ https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/21252054 http://dx.doi.org/10.1093/aje/kwq411 |
work_keys_str_mv | AT zhangjun prenatalapplicationoftheindividualizedfetalgrowthreference AT mikolajczykrafael prenatalapplicationoftheindividualizedfetalgrowthreference AT grewaljaceteshwar prenatalapplicationoftheindividualizedfetalgrowthreference AT netagila prenatalapplicationoftheindividualizedfetalgrowthreference AT klebanoffmark prenatalapplicationoftheindividualizedfetalgrowthreference |