scholarly journals Reexamining the effects of gestational age, fetal growth, and maternal smoking on neonatal mortality

2004 ◽  
Vol 4 (1) ◽  
Author(s):  
Cande V Ananth ◽  
Robert W Platt
1998 ◽  
Vol 178 (4) ◽  
pp. 726-731 ◽  
Author(s):  
Michael Y. Divon ◽  
Bengt Haglund ◽  
Henry Nisell ◽  
Petra Olausson Otterblad ◽  
Magnus Westgren

1996 ◽  
Vol 22 (1) ◽  
pp. 37-53 ◽  
Author(s):  
E Petridou ◽  
D Trichopoulos ◽  
K Revinthi ◽  
D Tong ◽  
E Papathoma
Keyword(s):  

2018 ◽  
pp. 184-195
Author(s):  
Minh Son Pham ◽  
Vu Quoc Huy Nguyen ◽  
Dinh Vinh Tran

Small for gestational age (SGA) and fetal growth restriction (FGR) is difficult to define exactly. In this pregnancy condition, the fetus does not reach its biological growth potential as a consequence of impaired placental function, which may be because of a variety of factors. Fetuses with FGR are at risk for perinatal morbidity and mortality, and poor long-term health outcomes, such as impaired neurological and cognitive development, and cardiovascular and endocrine diseases in adulthood. At present no gold standard for the diagnosis of SGA/FGR exists. The first aim of this review is to: summarize areas of consensus and controversy between recently published national guidelines on small for gestational age or fetal growth restriction; highlight any recent evidence that should be incorporated into existing guidelines. Another aim to summary a number of interventions which are being developed or coming through to clinical trial in an attempt to improve fetal growth in placental insufficiency. Key words: fetal growth restriction (FGR), Small for gestational age (SGA)


2021 ◽  
Vol 224 (2) ◽  
pp. S186
Author(s):  
Odessa P. Hamidi ◽  
Camille Driver ◽  
Tamara Stampalija ◽  
Sarah Martinez ◽  
Diana Gumina ◽  
...  

1993 ◽  
Vol 5 (4) ◽  
pp. 203-212 ◽  
Author(s):  
Roger A Fay ◽  
David A Ellwood

Originally all low birthweight infants were considered to be premature. When prematurity was redefined in terms of gestational age (SGA) and not preterm. With the large scale collection of obstetric data the distributions of birthweight at different gestational ages were described and from these, infants who were SGA could be defined. SGA became synonymous with terms such as growth retardation, but it soon became appearent that the two were not necessarily interchangeable. Scott and Usher found that it was the degree of soft tissue wasting rather than birthweight that related to poor perinatal outcome. Miller and Hassanein stated that: “birthweight by itself is not a valid measure of fetal growth impairment”. They used Rorher’s Ponderal Index (weight (g) × 100/length (cm)) to diagnose the malnourished or excessively wasted infants with reduced soft tissue mass. Most studies of intrauterine growth retardation (IUGR) still use low birthweight for gestational age centile as their only definition of IUGR or only study infants who have a low birthweight. Altman and Hytten expressed disquiet about this definition and stated: “There is now an urgent need to establish true measures of fetal growth from which deviations indicating genuine growth retardation can be derived” and that “it is particularly important that some reliable measures of outcome should be established”. In large series of term deliveries published recently, two groups of IUGR infants with different growth patterens have been identified. These studies confirm that birthweight alone is inadequate to define the different types of IUGR. They established that low Ponderal Index (PI) is a measure of IUGR associated with an increased incidence of perinatal problems and that it is time to re-evaluate IUGR in terms of the different types of aberrant fetal growth.


Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document