1
|
Lindström L, Cnattingius S, Axelsson O, Granfors M. Accuracy and precision of sonographic fetal weight estimation in Sweden. Acta Obstet Gynecol Scand 2023; 102:699-707. [PMID: 36964980 DOI: 10.1111/aogs.14554] [Citation(s) in RCA: 0] [Impact Index Per Article: 0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [Grants] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 11/10/2022] [Revised: 02/17/2023] [Accepted: 03/06/2023] [Indexed: 03/27/2023]
Abstract
INTRODUCTION Fetal growth assessment by ultrasound is an essential part of modern obstetric care. The formula by Persson and Weldner for estimated fetal weight (EFW), used in Sweden since decades, has not yet been evaluated. The objective of this study was to evaluate accuracy and precision of the formula by Persson and Weldner, and to compare it to two other formulae using biparietal diameter instead of head circumference. MATERIAL AND METHODS The study population consisted of 31 521 singleton pregnancies delivered at 22+0 gestational weeks or later, with an ultrasound EFW performed within 2 days before delivery, registered in the Swedish Pregnancy Register between 2014 and 2021. Fetal biometric ultrasound measurements were used to calculate EFW according to the formulae by Persson and Weldner, Hadlock 2 and Shepard. Bland-Altman analysis, systematic error (mean percentage error), random error (standard deviation [SD] of mean percentage error), proportion of weight estimates within ±10% of birthweight, and proportion with underestimated and overestimated weight was calculated. Moreover, calculations were made after stratification into small, appropriate, and large for gestational age (SGA, AGA and LGA), respectively, and gestational age at examination. RESULTS For the formula by Persson and Weldner, MPE was -2.7 (SD 8.9) and the proportion of EFW within ±10% from actual birthweight was 76.0%. MPE was largest for fetuses estimated as severe SGA (<3rd percentile, -5.4) and for the most preterm fetuses (<24 weeks, -5.4). For Hadlock 2 and Shepard's formulae, MPE were 3.9 (SD 8.9) and 3.4 (SD 9.7), respectively, and the proportions of EFW within ±10% from actual birthweight were 69.4% and 67.1%, respectively. MPE was largest for fetuses estimated as severe LGA (>97th percentile), 7.6 and 9.4, respectively. CONCLUSIONS The recommended Swedish formula by Persson and Weldner is generally accurate for fetal weight estimation. The systematic underestimation of EFW and random error is largest in extreme preterm and estimated SGA-fetuses, which is of importance in clinical decision making. The accuracy of EFW with the formula by Persson and Weldner is as good as or better than Hadlock 2 and Shepard's formulae.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Linda Lindström
- Division of Clinical Epidemiology, Department of Medicine (Solna), Karolinska Institutet, Stockholm, Sweden
- Department of Women's and Children's Health, Uppsala University, Uppsala, Sweden
| | - Sven Cnattingius
- Division of Clinical Epidemiology, Department of Medicine (Solna), Karolinska Institutet, Stockholm, Sweden
| | - Ove Axelsson
- Department of Women's and Children's Health, Uppsala University, Uppsala, Sweden
- Centre for Clinical Research Sörmland, Uppsala University, Eskilstuna, Sweden
| | - Michaela Granfors
- Division of Clinical Epidemiology, Department of Medicine (Solna), Karolinska Institutet, Stockholm, Sweden
- Division of Obstetrics, Department of Women's Health, Karolinska University Hospital, Stockholm, Sweden
| |
Collapse
|
2
|
Warshafsky C, Ronzoni S, Quaglietta P, Weiner E, Zaltz A, Barrett J, Melamed N, Aviram A. Comparison of sonographic fetal weight estimation formulas in patients with preterm premature rupture of membranes. BMC Pregnancy Childbirth 2021; 21:149. [PMID: 33607956 PMCID: PMC7893917 DOI: 10.1186/s12884-021-03631-w] [Citation(s) in RCA: 2] [Impact Index Per Article: 0.7] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [Track Full Text] [Download PDF] [Figures] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 11/12/2020] [Accepted: 02/05/2021] [Indexed: 11/10/2022] Open
Abstract
BACKGROUND Estimation of fetal weight (EFW) by ultrasound is useful in clinical decision-making. Numerous formulas for EFW have been published but have not been validated in pregnancies complicated by preterm premature rupture of membranes (PPROM). The purpose of this study is to compare the accuracy of EFW formulas in patients with PPROM, and to further evaluate the performance of the most commonly used formula - Hadlock IV. METHODS A retrospective cohort study of women with singleton gestations and PPROM, admitted to a single tertiary center between 2005 and 2017 from 220/7-330/7 (n = 565). All women had an EFW within 14 days of delivery by standard biometry (biparietal diameter, head circumference, abdominal circumference and femur length). The accuracy of previously published 21 estimated EFW formulas was assessed by comparing the Pearson correlation with actual birth weight, and calculating the random error, systematic error, proportion of estimates within 10% of birth weight, and Euclidean distance. RESULTS The mean gestational was 26.8 ± 2.4 weeks at admission, and 28.2 ± 2.6 weeks at delivery. Most formulas were strongly correlated with actual birth weight (r > 0.9 for 19/21 formulas). Mean systematic error was - 4.30% and mean random error was 14.5%. The highest performing formula, by the highest proportion of estimates and lowest Euclidean distance was Ott (1986), which uses abdominal and head circumferences, and femur length. However, there were minimal difference with all of the first 10 ranking formulas. The Pearson correlation coefficient for the Hadlock IV formula was strong at r = 0.935 (p < 0.001), with 319 (56.5%) of measurements falling within 10%, 408 (72.2%) within 15% and 455 (80.5%) within 20% of actual birth weight. This correlation was unaffected by gender (r = 0.936 for males, r = 0.932 for females, p < 0.001 for both) or by amniotic fluid level (r = 0.935 for mean vertical pocket < 2 cm, r = 0.943 for mean vertical pocket ≥2 cm, p < 0.001 for both). CONCLUSIONS In women with singleton gestation and PPROM, the Ott (1986) formula for EFW was the most accurate, yet all of the top ten ranking formulas performed quite well. The commonly used Hadlock IV performed quite similarly to Ott's formula, and is acceptable to use in this specific setting.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Chelsie Warshafsky
- Sunnybrook Health Sciences Centre, Department of Obstetrics and Gynecology, Division of Maternal-Fetal Medicine, University of Toronto, 2075 Bayview Ave, Toronto, ON, M4N 3M5, Canada
| | - Stefania Ronzoni
- Sunnybrook Health Sciences Centre, Department of Obstetrics and Gynecology, Division of Maternal-Fetal Medicine, University of Toronto, 2075 Bayview Ave, Toronto, ON, M4N 3M5, Canada
| | - Paula Quaglietta
- Sunnybrook Health Sciences Centre, Department of Obstetrics and Gynecology, Division of Maternal-Fetal Medicine, University of Toronto, 2075 Bayview Ave, Toronto, ON, M4N 3M5, Canada
| | - Eran Weiner
- Edith Wolfson Medical Center, Department of Obstetrics and Gynecology, Division of Maternal-Fetal Medicine, Holon, Sackler Faculty of Medicine, Tel-Aviv University, Tel-Aviv, Israel
| | - Arthur Zaltz
- Sunnybrook Health Sciences Centre, Department of Obstetrics and Gynecology, Division of Maternal-Fetal Medicine, University of Toronto, 2075 Bayview Ave, Toronto, ON, M4N 3M5, Canada
| | - Jon Barrett
- Sunnybrook Health Sciences Centre, Department of Obstetrics and Gynecology, Division of Maternal-Fetal Medicine, University of Toronto, 2075 Bayview Ave, Toronto, ON, M4N 3M5, Canada
| | - Nir Melamed
- Sunnybrook Health Sciences Centre, Department of Obstetrics and Gynecology, Division of Maternal-Fetal Medicine, University of Toronto, 2075 Bayview Ave, Toronto, ON, M4N 3M5, Canada
| | - Amir Aviram
- Sunnybrook Health Sciences Centre, Department of Obstetrics and Gynecology, Division of Maternal-Fetal Medicine, University of Toronto, 2075 Bayview Ave, Toronto, ON, M4N 3M5, Canada.
| |
Collapse
|
3
|
Blue NR, Savabi M, Beddow ME, Katukuri VR, Fritts CM, Izquierdo LA, Chao CR. The Hadlock Method Is Superior to Newer Methods for the Prediction of the Birth Weight Percentile. JOURNAL OF ULTRASOUND IN MEDICINE : OFFICIAL JOURNAL OF THE AMERICAN INSTITUTE OF ULTRASOUND IN MEDICINE 2019; 38:587-596. [PMID: 30244476 DOI: 10.1002/jum.14725] [Citation(s) in RCA: 19] [Impact Index Per Article: 3.8] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [MESH Headings] [Track Full Text] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 02/12/2018] [Accepted: 05/23/2018] [Indexed: 05/06/2023]
Abstract
OBJECTIVES To compare a traditional ultrasound (US) method for estimated fetal weight (EFW) calculation and fetal growth restriction diagnosis with 2 newer methods for the prediction of small for gestational age (SGA) at birth. METHODS We reviewed deliveries at our institution from January 1, 2013, to March 31, 2017. Singleton, nonanomalous, well-dated fetuses with a US examination within 2 weeks of delivery were included. Estimated fetal weights and percentiles were calculated by a traditional method (Hadlock et al; Radiology 1991; 181:129-133) and 2 newer methods: Intergrowth-21st (INTG; Ultrasound Obstet Gynecol 2017; 49:478-486) and Salomon et al (Ultrasound Obstet Gynecol 2007; 29:550-555). We calculated each method's test characteristics to predict SGA (birth weight < 10th percentile) using both traditional (EFW < 10th percentile) and receiver operating characteristic (ROC)-derived fetal growth restriction cutoffs. Mean percentile discrepancies between EFW and birth weight measurements were calculated to compare method accuracy. We hypothesized that the INTG and Salomon methods would have superior SGA prediction compared with the Hadlock method. RESULTS Of 831 pregnancies with a US examination within 2 weeks of delivery, 138 (16.7%) were SGA at birth. Hadlock had the smallest US-birth weight percentile discrepancy (P < .001 versus both INTG and Salomon). When comparing ROC curves, the Hadlock and INTG methods performed comparably, with areas under the curve of 0.91 and 0.90 (P = .08) and optimal EFW cutoffs of the 15th and 22nd percentiles, respectively. The Salomon method performed less well, with an area under the curve of 0.82 (P < .001 versus both Hadlock and INTG methods). CONCLUSIONS In our study cohort, the Hadlock method predicted the birth weight percentile more accurately than the INTG or Salomon methods and performed comparably with INTG to predict SGA when ROC-derived cutoffs were used.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Nathan R Blue
- Department of Obstetrics and Gynecology, Division of Maternal-Fetal Medicine, University of New Mexico, Albuquerque, New Mexico, USA
| | - Mariam Savabi
- Department of Obstetrics and Gynecology, Division of Maternal-Fetal Medicine, University of New Mexico, Albuquerque, New Mexico, USA
| | - Meghan E Beddow
- Department of Obstetrics and Gynecology, Division of Maternal-Fetal Medicine, University of New Mexico, Albuquerque, New Mexico, USA
| | - Vivek R Katukuri
- Department of Obstetrics and Gynecology, Division of Maternal-Fetal Medicine, University of New Mexico, Albuquerque, New Mexico, USA
| | - Cody M Fritts
- Department of Obstetrics and Gynecology, Division of Maternal-Fetal Medicine, University of New Mexico, Albuquerque, New Mexico, USA
| | - Luis A Izquierdo
- Department of Obstetrics and Gynecology, Division of Maternal-Fetal Medicine, University of New Mexico, Albuquerque, New Mexico, USA
| | - Conrad R Chao
- Department of Obstetrics and Gynecology, Division of Maternal-Fetal Medicine, University of New Mexico, Albuquerque, New Mexico, USA
| |
Collapse
|
4
|
Pils S, Springer S, Seemann R, Wehrmann V, Worda C, Ott J. Reliability of sonographic fetal weight estimation in triplet pregnancies: a retrospective cohort study. Arch Gynecol Obstet 2018; 297:1441-1447. [PMID: 29550943 PMCID: PMC5945739 DOI: 10.1007/s00404-018-4746-0] [Citation(s) in RCA: 3] [Impact Index Per Article: 0.5] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [MESH Headings] [Track Full Text] [Download PDF] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 08/07/2017] [Accepted: 03/12/2018] [Indexed: 11/30/2022]
Abstract
PURPOSE To review our experience in ultrasound fetal weight estimation in our large population of triplet pregnancies. METHODS Ninety-seven triplet pregnancies were retrospectively included between January 2003 and January 2017. Sonographic fetal weight estimation using Hadlock's and Schild's formulas was compared to actual birth weight in a tertiary-care center in Vienna, Austria. Statistical analyses were performed using a stepwise linear regression model and crosstabs. RESULTS The median discrepancy between the sonographically estimated fetal weight by Hadlock's formula and the actual birth weight was 106 g (IQR 56-190). The percentage error and its standard deviation were - 2.5 ± 12.1%, and the median percentage error was - 3.6%. Concerning the use of Hadlock's formula, estimated fetal weight was the most important factor predictive of actual birth weight with an estimate of 0.920 (p < 0.001). Female neonates had been overestimated by a mean of 50.473 g per fetus. The sonographic prediction of small-for-gestational-age neonates was significantly reliable (p < 0.001), with positive and negative predictive values ranging from 81.3 to 100.0%. Similar results were obtained for Schild's formula. CONCLUSION Even if sonographically estimated fetal weight in triplet pregnancies has a high overall accuracy of fetal weight estimation, there are some limitations in prediction of intrauterine growth restrictions, especially in female fetuses.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Sophie Pils
- Clinical Division of Gynecologic Endocrinology and Reproductive Medicine, Department of Obstetrics and Gynecology, Medical University of Vienna, Waehringer Guertel 18-20, 1090, Vienna, Austria
| | - Stephanie Springer
- Clinical Division of Obstetrics and Fetomaternal Medicine, Department of Obstetrics and Gynecology, Medical University of Vienna, Waehringer Guertel 18-20, 1090, Vienna, Austria
| | - Rudolf Seemann
- Department of Craniomaxillofacial and Oral Surgery, Medical University of Vienna, Waehringer Guertel 18-20, 1090, Vienna, Austria
| | - Verena Wehrmann
- Clinical Division of Gynecologic Endocrinology and Reproductive Medicine, Department of Obstetrics and Gynecology, Medical University of Vienna, Waehringer Guertel 18-20, 1090, Vienna, Austria
| | - Christof Worda
- Clinical Division of Obstetrics and Fetomaternal Medicine, Department of Obstetrics and Gynecology, Medical University of Vienna, Waehringer Guertel 18-20, 1090, Vienna, Austria
| | - Johannes Ott
- Clinical Division of Gynecologic Endocrinology and Reproductive Medicine, Department of Obstetrics and Gynecology, Medical University of Vienna, Waehringer Guertel 18-20, 1090, Vienna, Austria.
| |
Collapse
|
5
|
Shen Y, Zhao W, Lin J, Liu F. Accuracy of sonographic fetal weight estimation prior to delivery in a Chinese han population. JOURNAL OF CLINICAL ULTRASOUND : JCU 2017; 45:465-471. [PMID: 28332212 DOI: 10.1002/jcu.22463] [Citation(s) in RCA: 4] [Impact Index Per Article: 0.6] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [MESH Headings] [Track Full Text] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 08/11/2016] [Revised: 01/07/2017] [Accepted: 01/22/2017] [Indexed: 06/06/2023]
Abstract
OBJECTIVE To compare the sonographic-estimated fetal weights (EFW) calculated with the Hadlock formula and with the Woo formula in a group of Chinese pregnant women. METHODS We prospectively recruited term pregnancies for sonographic biometric examination. EFWs were calculated according to two formulas and compared with the corresponding birth weight (BW). We also assessed the sensitivity, specificity, positive predictive value (PPV), and negative predictive value (NPV) of EFW for the diagnosis of small-for-gestational age (SGA) and large-for-gestational age (LGA) neonates. RESULTS A total of 374 subjects who delivered within 7 days after the sonographic examinations was recruited. Using the Hadlock formula, the median absolute difference between EFW and BW was 182 g (15-308 g) and the median percentage difference was 5.3% (0.5-9.1%), whereas it was 230 g (62-367) and 7.1% (2.1-10.4%) for the Woo formula (p < 0.001). Several factors, namely the fetal presentation, gender, and high amniotic quantity, showed no evident impact on this predictive difference. Among the 175 women who delivered within 2 days after ultrasound, the sensitivity and specificity of Hadlock EFW were 100% and 97.1% for the detection of SGA and 48.1% and 97.3% for the detection of LGA, respectively. The PPV and NPV were 44.4% and 100.0% for the detection of SGA and 76.5% and 91.1% for the detection of LGA, respectively. CONCLUSIONS EFWs calculated using the Hadlock formula for our research subjects were as accurate as those reported for other populations. The predictive performance showed a high NPV for the diagnosis of SGA and a relatively acceptable PPV for the diagnosis of LGA. © 2017 Wiley Periodicals, Inc. J Clin Ultrasound 45:465-471, 2017.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Yao Shen
- Department of Obstetrics and Gynecology, Renji Hospital, School of Medicine, Shanghai Jiao Tong University, No. 160, Pujian Road, Shanghai, 200127, China
| | - WeiXiu Zhao
- Department of Obstetrics and Gynecology, Renji Hospital, School of Medicine, Shanghai Jiao Tong University, No. 160, Pujian Road, Shanghai, 200127, China
| | - JianHua Lin
- Department of Obstetrics and Gynecology, Renji Hospital, School of Medicine, Shanghai Jiao Tong University, No. 160, Pujian Road, Shanghai, 200127, China
| | - FangSun Liu
- Department of Obstetrics and Gynecology, Renji Hospital, School of Medicine, Shanghai Jiao Tong University, No. 160, Pujian Road, Shanghai, 200127, China
| |
Collapse
|
6
|
Broere-Brown ZA, Baan E, Schalekamp-Timmermans S, Verburg BO, Jaddoe VWV, Steegers EAP. Sex-specific differences in fetal and infant growth patterns: a prospective population-based cohort study. Biol Sex Differ 2016; 7:65. [PMID: 27980713 PMCID: PMC5135770 DOI: 10.1186/s13293-016-0119-1] [Citation(s) in RCA: 65] [Impact Index Per Article: 8.1] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [Track Full Text] [Download PDF] [Figures] [Journal Information] [Submit a Manuscript] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 08/25/2016] [Accepted: 11/23/2016] [Indexed: 11/15/2022] Open
Abstract
Background The objective of this study was to assess whether sex-specific differences in fetal and infant growth exist. Methods This study was embedded in the Generation R Study, a population-based prospective birth cohort. In total, 8556 live singleton births were included. Fetal growth was assessed by ultrasound. During the first trimester, crown-rump-length (CRL) was measured. In the second and third trimester of pregnancy head circumference (HC), abdominal circumference (AC) and femur length (FL) were assessed. Information on infant growth during the first 2 years of life was obtained from Community Health Centers and included HC, body weight and length. Results In the first trimester, male CRL was larger than female CRL (0.12 SD [95% CI 0.03,0.22]). From the second trimester onwards, HC and AC were larger in males than in females (0.30 SD [95% CI 0.26,0.34] and 0.09 SD [95% CI 0.05,0.014], respectively). However, FL in males was smaller compared to female fetuses (0.21 SD [95% CI 0.17,0.26]). Repeated measurement analyses showed a different prenatal as well as postnatal HC growth pattern between males and females. A different pattern in body weight was observed with a higher body weight in males until the age of 12 months where after females have a higher body weight. Conclusions Sex affects both fetal as well as infant growth. Besides body size, also body proportions differ between males and females with different growth patterns. This sexual dimorphism might arise from differences in fetal programming with sex specific health differences as a consequence in later life. Electronic supplementary material The online version of this article (doi:10.1186/s13293-016-0119-1) contains supplementary material, which is available to authorized users.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Zoe A Broere-Brown
- Department of Obstetrics and Gynecology, Erasmus Medical Center, PO Box 2040, 3000 CA Rotterdam, The Netherlands
| | - Esme Baan
- Department of Obstetrics and Gynecology, Erasmus Medical Center, PO Box 2040, 3000 CA Rotterdam, The Netherlands
| | - Sarah Schalekamp-Timmermans
- Department of Obstetrics and Gynecology, Erasmus Medical Center, PO Box 2040, 3000 CA Rotterdam, The Netherlands
| | - Bero O Verburg
- Department of Obstetrics and Gynecology, Erasmus Medical Center, PO Box 2040, 3000 CA Rotterdam, The Netherlands
| | - Vincent W V Jaddoe
- Department of Epidemiology, Erasmus Medical Center, Rotterdam, The Netherlands ; Department of Pediatrics, Erasmus Medical Center, Rotterdam, The Netherlands
| | - Eric A P Steegers
- Department of Obstetrics and Gynecology, Erasmus Medical Center, PO Box 2040, 3000 CA Rotterdam, The Netherlands
| |
Collapse
|