scholarly journals Historical development of estimated fetal weight calculation

2021 ◽  
pp. 18-25
Author(s):  
A.Yu. Alekseeva ◽  
◽  
A.M. Ziganshin ◽  
Keyword(s):  
Fetal Weight ◽  
Resonance Imaging ◽  
Accurate Calculation ◽  
Magnet Resonance Imaging ◽  
Third Trimester ◽  
The Third ◽  
Weight Calculation ◽  
Instrumental Approaches ◽  
Magnet Resonance ◽  
Estimated Fetal Weight

Accurate calculation of the estimated fetal weight is necessary for the choice of a correct approach to management of labour. Th e existing methods are not universal and require complex application. Th is article presents a review of literatures published in PubMed and Google Scholar databases in 1955-2021 and devoted to historical aspects in development of the existing clinical and instrumental approaches to calculation of estimated fetal weight. The paper presents existing methods for calculation of estimated fetal weight at diff erent gestational ages as well as methods making it possible to predict fetal weight before gestation onset. Data on their informative value during the third trimester and alterations in their accuracy depending on the pregnant patient’s BMI are presented. Th e topic of application of magnet-resonance imaging for fetometry is considered with comparison of this approach to a more common method of ultrasonography.

Possibilities of geometric modeling in reducing the error of estimated fetal weight calculation

2020 ◽  
Vol 69 (4) ◽  
pp. 13-22
Author(s):  
Viktor A. Mudrov
Keyword(s):  
Gold Standard ◽  
Geometric Modeling ◽  
Fetal Weight ◽  
Term Pregnancy ◽  
Average Value ◽  
Second Stage ◽  
The Third ◽  
Third Stage ◽  
Weight Calculation ◽  
Estimated Fetal Weight

Hypothesis/aims of study. The aim of this study was to evaluate the possibilities of geometric modeling in reducing the error of estimated fetal weight calculation. Study design, materials and methods. During the first stage of the study, a mathematical dependency was determined by geometric modeling of the results of an objective examination of the pregnant woman, which hypothetically will reduce the error of estimated fetal weight calculation. The second stage of the study included a prospective analysis of the error of the developed method and standard formulas for estimated fetal weight calculation at full-term pregnancy, and the third stage at preterm pregnancy. Weighing the newborn is the gold standard, which allows to objectively assess the error of the studied formulas. Results. The average value of the relative error of fetal weight calculation using the Jordanias formula was 14,2%, the Johnsons 18,6%, the Lankowitzs 16,2%, the Yakubovas 12,2%, the Rudakovs method 14,3%, and the developed formula 9,0%. Conclusion. The data obtained confirmed the high importance of geometric modeling in reducing the error of estimated fetal weight calculation.

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

A case of diagnosis of a giant fetal cervical teratoma

2018 ◽  
Author(s):  
S.V. Idimesheva, E.G. Bazhenova, V.A. Vedernikov
Keyword(s):  
Magnetic Resonance Imaging ◽  
Ultrasound Examination ◽  
Mature Teratoma ◽  
Tumor Resection ◽  
Histopathological Diagnosis ◽  
Resonance Imaging ◽  
Cervical Tumor ◽  
Third Trimester ◽  
The Third ◽  
Cervical Teratoma

А case of ultrasound diagnosis of the giant fetal cervical tumor in the third trimester of gestation is presented. The diagnosis of a cervical teratoma was supposed by ultrasound examination and magnetic resonance imaging. The tumor resection was successfully performed at 6 days of life. Histopathological diagnosis was mature teratoma.

Comparative assessment of informational content of the equations of F.P. Hadlock and the computer program of V.N. Demidov in determination of term of gestation and fetal weight in the III trimester of gestation

2017 ◽  
Author(s):  
E.A. Derkach , O.I. Guseva
Keyword(s):  
Computer Program ◽  
High Precision ◽  
Gestational Age ◽  
Computer Programs ◽  
Comparative Assessment ◽  
Fetal Weight ◽  
Informational Content ◽  
Third Trimester ◽  
The Third

Objectives: to compare the accuracy of equations F.P. Hadlock and computer programs by V.N. Demidov in determining gestational age and fetal weight in the third trimester of gestation. Materials: 328 patients in terms 36–42 weeks of gestation are examined. Ultrasonography was performed in 0–5 days prior to childbirth. Results: it is established that the average mistake in determination of term of pregnancy when using the equation of F.P. Hadlock made 12,5 days, the computer program of V.N. Demidov – 4,4 days (distinction 2,8 times). The mistake within 4 days, when using the equation of F.P. Hadlock has met on average in 23,1 % of observations, the computer program of V.N. Demidov — 65,9 % (difference in 2,9 times). The mistake more than 10 days, took place respectively in 51,7 and 8,2 % (distinction by 6,3 times). At a comparative assessment of size of a mistake in determination of fetal mass it is established that when using the equation of F.P. Hadlock it has averaged 281,0 g, at application of the computer program of V.N. Demidov — 182,5 g (distinction of 54 %). The small mistake in the mass of a fetus which isn't exceeding 200 g at application of the equation of F.P. Hadlock has met in 48,1 % of cases and the computer program of V.N. Demidov — 64,0 % (distinction of 33,1 %). The mistake exceeding 500 g has been stated in 18 % (F.P. Hadlock) and 4,3 % (V.N. Demidov) respectively (distinction 4,2 times). Conclusions: the computer program of V.N. Demidov has high precision in determination of term of a gestation and mass of a fetus in the III pregnancy.

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document