Cargando…

The impact of optimal dating on the assessment of fetal growth

BACKGROUND: The impact of using the Intergrowth (IG) dating formulae in comparison to the commonly used Robinson dating on the evaluation of biometrics and estimated fetal weight (EFW) has not been evaluated. METHODS: Nationwide cross-sectional study of routine fetal ultrasound biometry in low-risk...

Descripción completa

Detalles Bibliográficos
Autores principales: Fries, N., Dhombres, F., Massoud, M., Stirnemann, J. J., Bessis, R., Haddad, G., Salomon, L. J.
Formato: Online Artículo Texto
Lenguaje:English
Publicado: BioMed Central 2021
Materias:
Acceso en línea:https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC7912534/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/33639870
http://dx.doi.org/10.1186/s12884-021-03640-9
_version_ 1783656598727557120
author Fries, N.
Dhombres, F.
Massoud, M.
Stirnemann, J. J.
Bessis, R.
Haddad, G.
Salomon, L. J.
author_facet Fries, N.
Dhombres, F.
Massoud, M.
Stirnemann, J. J.
Bessis, R.
Haddad, G.
Salomon, L. J.
author_sort Fries, N.
collection PubMed
description BACKGROUND: The impact of using the Intergrowth (IG) dating formulae in comparison to the commonly used Robinson dating on the evaluation of biometrics and estimated fetal weight (EFW) has not been evaluated. METHODS: Nationwide cross-sectional study of routine fetal ultrasound biometry in low-risk pregnant women whose gestational age (GA) had been previously assessed by a first trimester CRL measurement. We compared the CRL-based GA according to the Robinson formula and the IG formula. We evaluated the fetal biometric measurements as well as the EFW taken later in pregnancy depending on the dating formula used. Mean and standard deviation of the Z scores as well as the number and percentage of cases classified as <3rd, < 10th, >90th and > 97th percentile were compared. RESULTS: Three thousand five hundred twenty-two low-risk women with scans carried out after 18 weeks were included. There were differences of zero, one and 2 days in 642 (18.2%), 2700 (76.7%) and 180 (5%) when GA was estimated based on the Robinson or the IG formula, respectively. The biometry Z scores assessed later in pregnancy were all statistically significantly lower when the Intergrowth-based dating formula was used (p < 10(− 4)). Likewise, the number and percentage of foetuses classified as <3rd, < 10th, >90th and > 97th percentile demonstrated significant differences. As an example, the proportion of SGA foetuses varied from 3.46 to 4.57% (p = 0.02) and that of LGA foetuses from 17.86 to 13.4% (p < 10(− 4)). CONCLUSION: The dating formula used has a quite significant impact on the subsequent evaluation of biometry and EFW. We suggest that the combined and homogeneous use of a recent dating standard, together with prescriptive growth standards established on the same low-risk pregnancies, allows an optimal assessment of fetal growth.
format Online
Article
Text
id pubmed-7912534
institution National Center for Biotechnology Information
language English
publishDate 2021
publisher BioMed Central
record_format MEDLINE/PubMed
spelling pubmed-79125342021-03-02 The impact of optimal dating on the assessment of fetal growth Fries, N. Dhombres, F. Massoud, M. Stirnemann, J. J. Bessis, R. Haddad, G. Salomon, L. J. BMC Pregnancy Childbirth Research Article BACKGROUND: The impact of using the Intergrowth (IG) dating formulae in comparison to the commonly used Robinson dating on the evaluation of biometrics and estimated fetal weight (EFW) has not been evaluated. METHODS: Nationwide cross-sectional study of routine fetal ultrasound biometry in low-risk pregnant women whose gestational age (GA) had been previously assessed by a first trimester CRL measurement. We compared the CRL-based GA according to the Robinson formula and the IG formula. We evaluated the fetal biometric measurements as well as the EFW taken later in pregnancy depending on the dating formula used. Mean and standard deviation of the Z scores as well as the number and percentage of cases classified as <3rd, < 10th, >90th and > 97th percentile were compared. RESULTS: Three thousand five hundred twenty-two low-risk women with scans carried out after 18 weeks were included. There were differences of zero, one and 2 days in 642 (18.2%), 2700 (76.7%) and 180 (5%) when GA was estimated based on the Robinson or the IG formula, respectively. The biometry Z scores assessed later in pregnancy were all statistically significantly lower when the Intergrowth-based dating formula was used (p < 10(− 4)). Likewise, the number and percentage of foetuses classified as <3rd, < 10th, >90th and > 97th percentile demonstrated significant differences. As an example, the proportion of SGA foetuses varied from 3.46 to 4.57% (p = 0.02) and that of LGA foetuses from 17.86 to 13.4% (p < 10(− 4)). CONCLUSION: The dating formula used has a quite significant impact on the subsequent evaluation of biometry and EFW. We suggest that the combined and homogeneous use of a recent dating standard, together with prescriptive growth standards established on the same low-risk pregnancies, allows an optimal assessment of fetal growth. BioMed Central 2021-02-27 /pmc/articles/PMC7912534/ /pubmed/33639870 http://dx.doi.org/10.1186/s12884-021-03640-9 Text en © The Author(s) 2021 Open AccessThis article is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License, which permits use, sharing, adaptation, distribution and reproduction in any medium or format, as long as you give appropriate credit to the original author(s) and the source, provide a link to the Creative Commons licence, and indicate if changes were made. The images or other third party material in this article are included in the article's Creative Commons licence, unless indicated otherwise in a credit line to the material. If material is not included in the article's Creative Commons licence and your intended use is not permitted by statutory regulation or exceeds the permitted use, you will need to obtain permission directly from the copyright holder. To view a copy of this licence, visit http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/. 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 in a credit line to the data.
spellingShingle Research Article
Fries, N.
Dhombres, F.
Massoud, M.
Stirnemann, J. J.
Bessis, R.
Haddad, G.
Salomon, L. J.
The impact of optimal dating on the assessment of fetal growth
title The impact of optimal dating on the assessment of fetal growth
title_full The impact of optimal dating on the assessment of fetal growth
title_fullStr The impact of optimal dating on the assessment of fetal growth
title_full_unstemmed The impact of optimal dating on the assessment of fetal growth
title_short The impact of optimal dating on the assessment of fetal growth
title_sort impact of optimal dating on the assessment of fetal growth
topic Research Article
url https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC7912534/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/33639870
http://dx.doi.org/10.1186/s12884-021-03640-9
work_keys_str_mv AT friesn theimpactofoptimaldatingontheassessmentoffetalgrowth
AT dhombresf theimpactofoptimaldatingontheassessmentoffetalgrowth
AT massoudm theimpactofoptimaldatingontheassessmentoffetalgrowth
AT stirnemannjj theimpactofoptimaldatingontheassessmentoffetalgrowth
AT bessisr theimpactofoptimaldatingontheassessmentoffetalgrowth
AT haddadg theimpactofoptimaldatingontheassessmentoffetalgrowth
AT salomonlj theimpactofoptimaldatingontheassessmentoffetalgrowth
AT friesn impactofoptimaldatingontheassessmentoffetalgrowth
AT dhombresf impactofoptimaldatingontheassessmentoffetalgrowth
AT massoudm impactofoptimaldatingontheassessmentoffetalgrowth
AT stirnemannjj impactofoptimaldatingontheassessmentoffetalgrowth
AT bessisr impactofoptimaldatingontheassessmentoffetalgrowth
AT haddadg impactofoptimaldatingontheassessmentoffetalgrowth
AT salomonlj impactofoptimaldatingontheassessmentoffetalgrowth