scholarly journals “Screening for small-for-gestational age neonates at early third trimester in a high-risk population for preeclampsia”

2020 ◽  
Vol 20 (1) ◽  
Author(s):  
Raquel Mula ◽  
Eva Meler ◽  
Sandra García ◽  
Gerard Albaigés ◽  
Bernat Serra ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Growth Factor ◽  
High Risk ◽  
Biochemical Markers ◽  
Pulsatility Index ◽  
Uterine Artery ◽  
Placental Growth Factor ◽  
Fetal Weight ◽  
Third Trimester ◽  
Maternal Characteristics ◽  
Estimated Fetal Weight

Abstract Background Strategies to improve prenatal detection of small-for-gestational age (SGA) neonates are necessary because its association with poorer perinatal outcome. This study evaluated, in pregnancies with first trimester high risk of early preeclampsia, the performance of a third trimester screening for SGA combining biophysical and biochemical markers. Methods This is a prospective longitudinal study on 378 singleton pregnancies identified at high risk of early preeclampsia according to a first trimester multiparametric algorithm with the cutoff corresponding to 15% false positive rate. This cohort included 50 cases that delivered SGA neonates with birthweight < 10th centile (13.2%) and 328 cases with normal birthweight (86.8%). At 27–30 weeks’ gestation, maternal weight, blood pressure, estimated fetal weight, mean uterine artery pulsatility index and maternal biochemical markers (placental growth factor and soluble FMS-Like Tyrosine Kinase-1) were assessed. Different predictive models were created to evaluate their performance to predict SGA neonates. Results For a 15% FPR, a model that combines maternal characteristics, estimated fetal weight, mean uterine artery pulsatility index and placental growth factor achieved a detection rate (DR) of 56% with a negative predictive value of 92.2%. The area under receiver operating characteristic curve (AUC) was 0.79 (95% confidence interval (CI), 0.72–0.86). The DR of a model including maternal characteristics, estimated fetal weight and mean uterine artery pulsatility index was 54% (AUC, 0.77 (95% CI, 0.70–0.84)). The DR of a model that includes maternal characteristics and placental growth factor achieved a similar performance (DR 56%, AUC 0.75, 95% CI (0.67–0.83)). Conclusions The performance of screening for SGA neonates at early third trimester combining biophysical and biochemical markers in a high-risk population is poor. However, a high negative predictive value could help in reducing maternal anxiety, avoid iatrogenic interventions and propose a specific plan for higher risk patients.

Discrepancy Analysis between Clinical Versus Ultrasound Estimated Fetal Weight and Actual Birth Weight at 3rd Trimester

2019 ◽  
Vol 11 (1) ◽  
pp. 32-38
Author(s):  
Naznin Rashid Shewly ◽  
Menoka Ferdous ◽  
Hasina Begum ◽  
Shahadat Hossain Khan ◽  
Sheema Rani Debee ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Birth Weight ◽  
Low Birth Weight ◽  
Fetal Weight ◽  
P Value ◽  
Weight Estimation ◽  
Third Trimester ◽  
Mortality And Morbidity ◽  
Fetal Weight Estimation ◽  
Obstetric Management ◽  
Estimated Fetal Weight

Background: In obstetric management fetal weight estimation is an important consideration when planning the mode of delivery in our day to day practice. In Bangladesh low birth weight is a major public health problem & incidence is 38% - 58%. Neonatal mortality and morbidity also yet high. So accurate antenatal estimation of fetal weight is a good way to detect macrosomia or small for date baby. Thus to improve the pregnancy outcome and neonatal outcome decreasing various chance of neonatal mortality and morbidity antenatal fetal weight prediction is an invaluable parameter in some situation where to identify the at risk pregnancy for low birth weight become necessary. Reliable method for prenatal estimation of fetal weight two modalities have got popularity - Clinical estimation and another one is ultrasonic estimation. This study was designed to determine the accuracy of clinical versus ultrasound estimated fetal weight detecting the discrepancy with actual birth weight at third trimester. So that we can verify more reliable and accurate method. Objectives: To find out more accurate and reliable modality of fetal weight estimation in antenatal period during obstetric management planning. To compare clinical versus ultrasound estimated fetal weight & to determine discrepancy of both variable with actual birth weight. Method: This prospective, cross sectional analytical study was carried out in Dhaka Medical College Hospital from January 2006 to December 2006. By purposive sampling 100 pregnant women fulfilling inclusion criteria were included in my study in third trimester (29wks-40wks). In clinical weight estimation procedure SFH (Symphysio Fundal Height) was measured in centimeter. On pervaginal finding whether vertex below or above the ischial spine was determined. By Johnson’s formula fetal weight in grams was estimated. Then by ultrasound scan different biometric measurements were taken and finally by Hadlock’s formula fetal weight was estimated. Eventually actual birth weight was taken after birth by Globe Brand weighing machine. Accuracy of both modalities were compared and which one was more reliable predictor was determined by statistical analysis. Results: After data collection were analyzed by computer based software (SPSS). There was gradual and positive relationship between symphysiofundal height and estimated birth weight. Discrepancy between clinical and actual birth weight at third trimester was statistically significant – Paired Student’s ‘t’ test was done where p value was <0.001. Whereas discrepancy between sonographically estimated fetal weight with actual birth weight was not statistically significant (by paired ‘t’ test where p value was >0.05). That implies discrepancy between ultrasound estimated fetal weight and actual birth weight was significantly less than that of clinically estimated fetal weight. 14% clinically and 46% sonographically estimated fetal weight were observed within £ 5% of actual birth weight. 31% clinical and 42% sonographically estimates observed within 6% to 10% of actual birth weight and 55% clinical and 12% sonographically estimate were >10% of actual birth weight. That is about 88% sonographical versus 45% clinical estimates were within 10% of actual birth weight. Conclusion: There is no doubt about importance of fetal weight in many obstetric situations. Clinical decisions at times depends on fetal weight. Whether to use oxytocin, to use forceps or vacuum for delivery or extend of trial or ended by Caesarian section immediately or no scope of trial to be largely depend on fetal size and weight. So more accurate modality for antenatal fetal weight estimation has paramount importance. In my study sonographically estimated weight have more accuracy than that of clinical estimate in predicting actual birth weight. Sonographically estimated fetal weight is more reliable, accurate and reproducible rather than other modality. J Shaheed Suhrawardy Med Coll, June 2019, Vol.11(1); 32-38

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document