Cargando…

Accuracy of immediate antepartum ultrasound estimated fetal weight and its impact on mode of delivery and outcome - a cohort analysis

BACKGROUND: The aim of the study was to investigate the accuracy of ultrasound-derived estimated fetal weight (EFW) and to determine its impact on management and outcome of delivery. METHODS: In this single-center cohort analysis, women with a singleton term pregnancy in the beginning stages of labo...

Descripción completa

Detalles Bibliográficos
Autores principales: Stubert, Johannes, Peschel, Adam, Bolz, Michael, Glass, Änne, Gerber, Bernd
Formato: Online Artículo Texto
Lenguaje:English
Publicado: BioMed Central 2018
Materias:
Acceso en línea:https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC5930666/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/29716537
http://dx.doi.org/10.1186/s12884-018-1772-7
_version_ 1783319519602671616
author Stubert, Johannes
Peschel, Adam
Bolz, Michael
Glass, Änne
Gerber, Bernd
author_facet Stubert, Johannes
Peschel, Adam
Bolz, Michael
Glass, Änne
Gerber, Bernd
author_sort Stubert, Johannes
collection PubMed
description BACKGROUND: The aim of the study was to investigate the accuracy of ultrasound-derived estimated fetal weight (EFW) and to determine its impact on management and outcome of delivery. METHODS: In this single-center cohort analysis, women with a singleton term pregnancy in the beginning stages of labor were included. Women with immediately antepartum EFW (N = 492) were compared to women without ultrasound (N = 515). RESULTS: EFW was correct (deviation from birth weight ≤ 10%) in 72.2% (355/492) of patients with fetal biometry; 19.7% (97/492) were underestimated, and 8.1% (40/492) were overestimated. Newborns with a lower birth weight were more frequently overestimated, and newborns with higher birth weight were more frequently underestimated. The mean difference between EFW and real birth weight was − 114.5 g (standard deviation ±313 g, 95% confidence interval 87.1–142.0). The rate of non-reassuring fetal heart tracing (9.8% vs. 1.9%, P < 0.001) and of caesarean delivery (9.1% vs. 5.0%, P = 0.013) was higher in women with EFW. Overestimation was associated with an increased risk for delivery by caesarean section (odds ratio 2.80; 95% confidence interval 1.2–6.5, P = 0.017). After adjustment, EFW remained associated with increased non-reassuring fetal heart tracing (odds ratio 4.73; 95% confidence interval 2.3–9.6) and caesarean delivery (odds ratio 1.86; 95% confidence interval 1.1–3.1). The incidence of perineal tears of grade 3/4, shoulder dystocia, postnatal depression and neonatal acidosis did not differ between groups. CONCLUSIONS: Antepartum ultrasound-derived EFW does not improve maternal and fetal outcome and is therefore not recommended.
format Online
Article
Text
id pubmed-5930666
institution National Center for Biotechnology Information
language English
publishDate 2018
publisher BioMed Central
record_format MEDLINE/PubMed
spelling pubmed-59306662018-05-09 Accuracy of immediate antepartum ultrasound estimated fetal weight and its impact on mode of delivery and outcome - a cohort analysis Stubert, Johannes Peschel, Adam Bolz, Michael Glass, Änne Gerber, Bernd BMC Pregnancy Childbirth Research Article BACKGROUND: The aim of the study was to investigate the accuracy of ultrasound-derived estimated fetal weight (EFW) and to determine its impact on management and outcome of delivery. METHODS: In this single-center cohort analysis, women with a singleton term pregnancy in the beginning stages of labor were included. Women with immediately antepartum EFW (N = 492) were compared to women without ultrasound (N = 515). RESULTS: EFW was correct (deviation from birth weight ≤ 10%) in 72.2% (355/492) of patients with fetal biometry; 19.7% (97/492) were underestimated, and 8.1% (40/492) were overestimated. Newborns with a lower birth weight were more frequently overestimated, and newborns with higher birth weight were more frequently underestimated. The mean difference between EFW and real birth weight was − 114.5 g (standard deviation ±313 g, 95% confidence interval 87.1–142.0). The rate of non-reassuring fetal heart tracing (9.8% vs. 1.9%, P < 0.001) and of caesarean delivery (9.1% vs. 5.0%, P = 0.013) was higher in women with EFW. Overestimation was associated with an increased risk for delivery by caesarean section (odds ratio 2.80; 95% confidence interval 1.2–6.5, P = 0.017). After adjustment, EFW remained associated with increased non-reassuring fetal heart tracing (odds ratio 4.73; 95% confidence interval 2.3–9.6) and caesarean delivery (odds ratio 1.86; 95% confidence interval 1.1–3.1). The incidence of perineal tears of grade 3/4, shoulder dystocia, postnatal depression and neonatal acidosis did not differ between groups. CONCLUSIONS: Antepartum ultrasound-derived EFW does not improve maternal and fetal outcome and is therefore not recommended. BioMed Central 2018-05-02 /pmc/articles/PMC5930666/ /pubmed/29716537 http://dx.doi.org/10.1186/s12884-018-1772-7 Text en © The Author(s). 2018 Open AccessThis article is distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License (http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/), which permits unrestricted use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided you give appropriate credit to the original author(s) and the source, provide a link to the Creative Commons license, and indicate if changes were made. The Creative Commons Public Domain Dedication waiver (http://creativecommons.org/publicdomain/zero/1.0/) applies to the data made available in this article, unless otherwise stated.
spellingShingle Research Article
Stubert, Johannes
Peschel, Adam
Bolz, Michael
Glass, Änne
Gerber, Bernd
Accuracy of immediate antepartum ultrasound estimated fetal weight and its impact on mode of delivery and outcome - a cohort analysis
title Accuracy of immediate antepartum ultrasound estimated fetal weight and its impact on mode of delivery and outcome - a cohort analysis
title_full Accuracy of immediate antepartum ultrasound estimated fetal weight and its impact on mode of delivery and outcome - a cohort analysis
title_fullStr Accuracy of immediate antepartum ultrasound estimated fetal weight and its impact on mode of delivery and outcome - a cohort analysis
title_full_unstemmed Accuracy of immediate antepartum ultrasound estimated fetal weight and its impact on mode of delivery and outcome - a cohort analysis
title_short Accuracy of immediate antepartum ultrasound estimated fetal weight and its impact on mode of delivery and outcome - a cohort analysis
title_sort accuracy of immediate antepartum ultrasound estimated fetal weight and its impact on mode of delivery and outcome - a cohort analysis
topic Research Article
url https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC5930666/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/29716537
http://dx.doi.org/10.1186/s12884-018-1772-7
work_keys_str_mv AT stubertjohannes accuracyofimmediateantepartumultrasoundestimatedfetalweightanditsimpactonmodeofdeliveryandoutcomeacohortanalysis
AT pescheladam accuracyofimmediateantepartumultrasoundestimatedfetalweightanditsimpactonmodeofdeliveryandoutcomeacohortanalysis
AT bolzmichael accuracyofimmediateantepartumultrasoundestimatedfetalweightanditsimpactonmodeofdeliveryandoutcomeacohortanalysis
AT glassanne accuracyofimmediateantepartumultrasoundestimatedfetalweightanditsimpactonmodeofdeliveryandoutcomeacohortanalysis
AT gerberbernd accuracyofimmediateantepartumultrasoundestimatedfetalweightanditsimpactonmodeofdeliveryandoutcomeacohortanalysis