Fetal growth potential and pregnancy outcome

Risk of intellectual disability in children born appropriate-for-gestational-age at term or post-term: impact of birth weight for gestational age and gestational age

Children born small for gestational age have a higher risk of intellectual disability. We investigated associations of birth weight for gestational age percentile and gestational age with risk of intellectual disability in appropriate-for-gestational-age (AGA) children. We included 828,948 non-malformed term or post-term AGA singleton children (including 429,379 full siblings) born between 1998 and 2009 based on data from the Swedish Medical Birth Register. Diagnosis of intellectual disability after 3 years of age was identified through the Patient Register. Using Cox regression models, we calculated hazard ratios (HRs) with 95% confidence intervals (CIs) of intellectual disability among children with different birth weight percentiles and gestational age in the whole population and in a subpopulation of full siblings. A total of 1688 children were diagnosed with intellectual disability during follow-up. HRs (95% CIs) of intellectual disability for the low birth weight percentile groups (10th–24th and 25th–39th percentiles, respectively) versus the reference group (40th–59th percentiles) were 1.43 (1.22–1.67) and 1.28 (1.10–1.50) in population analysis and 1.52 (1.00–2.31) and 1.44 (1.00–2.09) in sibling comparison analysis. The increased risk for low birth weight percentiles in population analysis was stable irrespective of gestational age. A weak U-shaped association between gestational age and intellectual disability was observed in population analysis, although not in sibling comparison analysis. These findings suggest that among AGA children born at term or post-term, lower birth weight percentiles within the normal range are associated with increased risk of intellectual disability, regardless of gestational age.

New Japanese neonatal anthropometric charts for gestational age at birth

BACKGROUND

More than 10 years have passed since the previous Japanese neonatal growth charts were published, therefore the aim of this study was to develop an updated set of Japanese neonatal growth charts.

METHODS

We used data from the registry database of the Japan Society of Obstetrics and Gynecology from 2003 until 2005. A total of 150,471 singleton live births without stillbirth or severe congenital malformation were enrolled in the preliminary analysis. It was found that the distribution of the 10th centile charts based on these subjects was skewed toward lower birthweight for preterm infants, because of the significantly lower birthweight in the 10th centile in neonates delivered by cesarean section than those delivered vaginally. Therefore, the data of subjects delivered by cesarean section were also excluded.

RESULTS

Finally, 104,748 singleton vaginal births at 22-41 weeks of gestation were used to construct a new set of Japanese neonatal anthropometric charts. The birthweight chart is parity and sex specific. The differences between the Japanese fetal growth chart and the new neonatal birthweight chart were small.

CONCLUSION

The present new neonatal anthropometric charts may reveal unrestricted growth pattern mimicking fetal growth. Use of these charts may result in recognition of abnormal fetal growth and risk in preterm infants. Further studies are needed to evaluate the risk for adverse neonatal and long-term outcome among small-for-gestational-age infants using these neonatal charts.

When is birthweight at term abnormally low? A systematic review and meta-analysis of the association and predictive ability of current birthweight standards for neonatal outcomes

Background

Intrauterine growth restriction is a cause of neonatal morbidity and mortality. A variety of definitions of low birthweight are used in clinical practice, with a lack of consensus regarding which definitions best predict adverse outcomes.

Objectives

To evaluate the relationship between birthweight standards and neonatal outcome in term-born infants (at ≥ 37 weeks of gestation).

Search strategy

MEDLINE (1966–January 2011), EMBASE (1980–January 2011), and the Cochrane Library (2011:1) and MEDION were included in our search.

Selection criteria

Studies comprising live term-born infants (gestation ≥ 37 completed weeks), with weight or other anthropometric measurements recorded at birth along with neonatal outcomes.

Data collection and analysis

Data were extracted to populate 2 × 2 tables relating birthweight standard with outcome, and meta-analysis was performed where possible.

Main results

Twenty-nine studies including 21 034 114 neonates were selected. Absolute birthweight was strongly associated with mortality, with birthweight < 1.5 kg giving the largest association (OR 48.6, 95% CI 28.62–82.53). When using centile charts, regardless of threshold, the summary odds ratios were significant but closer to 1 than when using absolute birthweight. For all tests, summary predictive ability comprised high specificity and positive likelihood ratio for neonatal death, but low sensitivity and a negative likelihood ratio close to 1.

Author's conclusions

Absolute birthweight is a prognostic factor for neonatal mortality. The indirect evidence suggests that centile charts or other definitions of low birthweight are not as strongly associated with mortality as the absolute birthweight. Further research is required to improve predictive accuracy.

Intrauterine growth restriction: effects of physiological fetal growth determinants on diagnosis

The growth of the fetus, which is strongly associated with the outcome of pregnancy, reflects interplay of several physiological and pathological factors. The assessment of fetal growth is based on comparison of birthweight (BW) or estimated fetal weight (EFW) to standards which define reference ranges at a spectrum of gestational ages. Most birthweight standards do not take into account effects of physiological determinants of fetal growth. Additionally, gestational age in many standards is based on the menstrual history and is often inaccurate. Fetal growth norms should be based on an early ultrasound estimate of gestational age. Customized standards, which have included only ultrasound-dated pregnancies, seem to be superior to population-based birthweight norms in predicting perinatal mortality and morbidity. Adjustment for individual variation in customized growth curves reduces false-positive diagnosis of IUGR and may lead to a very significant reduction in intervention for suspected IUGR. Customized growth potential identifies better the risk for adverse outcome than the currently used national standards, but customized charts may fail in detecting growth-restricted stillbirth. An individual's birthweight is the sum of physiological and pathological influences operating during pregnancy. Growth potential norms are a better discriminator of aberrations of fetal growth than population, ultrasound, and customized norms.

Prenatal application of the individualized fetal growth reference

The individualized reference for defining small for gestational age (SGA) at birth has gained popularity in recent years. However, its utility on fetal assessment has not been evaluated. The authors compare an individualized with an ultrasound reference in predicting poor perinatal outcomes. Data from a large clinical trial in predominantly white US women (1987–1991) with singleton pregnancies (n = 9,526) were used. The individualized reference classified fewer SGA fetuses than the ultrasound reference, but the risks of adverse outcomes were similar between fetuses classified by both references. The risk increased substantially only when the percentiles fell below the 5th percentile (likelihood ratio positive at birth = 2.68 (95% confidence interval (CI): 2.00, 3.58) and 3.13 (95% CI: 2.34, 4.18) for ultrasound and individualized references, respectively). SGA fetuses defined by either the individualized or ultrasound reference alone had risk ratios of adverse outcomes of 1.91 (95% CI: 0.77, 4.77) and 1.18 (95% CI: 0.37, 3.77), respectively, compared with normal fetuses (the difference between these 2 risk ratios, P = 0.71). The authors conclude that neither the ultrasound-based nor the individualized reference does well in predicting adverse perinatal outcomes. The 5th percentile may be a better cutpoint than the 10th percentile in defining SGA.

Defining normal and abnormal fetal growth: promises and challenges

Normal fetal growth is a critical component of a healthy pregnancy and influences the long-term health of the offspring. However, defining normal and abnormal fetal growth has been a long-standing challenge in clinical practice and research. We review various references and standards that are used widely to evaluate fetal growth and discuss common pitfalls of current definitions of abnormal fetal growth. Pros and cons of different approaches to customize fetal growth standards are described. We further discuss recent advances toward an integrated definition for fetal growth restriction. Such a definition may incorporate fetal size with the status of placental health that is measured by maternal and fetal Doppler velocimetry and biomarkers, biophysical findings, and genetics. Although the concept of an integrated definition appears promising, further development and testing are required. An improved definition of abnormal fetal growth should benefit both research and clinical practice.

Leptin in first trimester pregnancy serum: no reduction associated with small-for-gestational-age infants

Leptin is an adipocytokine that is also synthesized by the placenta. Leptin and its receptor, which is also expressed by the placenta, are believed to play an auto- and paracrine role in trophoblast invasion and placental development. The leptin concentration in first trimester maternal serum and its relation to fetal growth disturbances were examined in this study. The study is a case-control study with 36 small-for-gestational-age (SGA) (<5th percentile) pregnancies and 108 appropriate-for-gestational-age (AGA) (> or =5th percentile) pregnancies. The groups were matched by maternal age, gestational age and body mass index (BMI). All were non-smokers. Leptin was measured in maternal serum in weeks 8-13 and was normalized for BMI with concentrations expressed as multiples of the median for the actual BMI. It was found that maternal serum leptin increased strongly (r = 0.7, P < 10(-4))with maternal BMI. There was no significant difference in maternal serum leptin concentrations between SGA and AGA pregnancies. In conclusion, SGA pregnancies are not associated with a lower maternal serum leptin concentration in first trimester. The maternal serum leptin concentration is largely determined by maternal BMI. Variation in the leptin concentration in maternal serum in first trimester does not seem to be associated with impaired fetal growth.

Comparison of fetal and neonatal growth curves in detecting growth restriction

OBJECTIVE

To evaluate the outcome of intrauterine growth restriction (IUGR) infants with abnormal pulsatility index of the umbilical artery according to the neonatal birth weight/gestational age standards and the intrauterine growth charts.

METHODS

We analyzed 53 pregnancies with severe IUGR classified as group 2 (22 IUGR: abnormal pulsatility index and normal fetal heart rate) and group 3 (31 IUGR: abnormal pulsatility index and fetal heart rate). Neonatal birth weight/gestational age distribution, body size measurements, maternal characteristics and obstetric outcome, and neonatal major and minor morbidity and mortality were compared with those obtained in 79 singleton pregnancies with normal fetal growth and pulsatility index, matched for gestational age (appropriate for gestational age [AGA] group). Differences were analyzed with the chi(2) test and the Student t test. Differences between means corrected for gestational age in the different groups were assessed by analysis of covariance test. A P<.05 was considered significant.

RESULTS

At delivery, using the neonatal standards, 25 of 53 (47%) IUGR showed a birth weight above the 10th percentile (IUGR(AGA)), whereas in 28, birth weight was below the 10th percentile (IUGR small for gestational age [SGA]-IUGR(SGA)). All body size measurements were significantly higher in AGA than in IUGR(AGA) and IUGR(SGA). Forty-nine of 79 (62%) AGA and 49 of 53 (92%) IUGR were admitted to the neonatal intensive care unit (P<.001). One of 79 (1%) AGA and 6 of 53 (11%) IUGR newborns died within 28 days (P<.02). Major and minor morbidity was not different.

CONCLUSION

This study shows that neonatal outcome is similar in IUGR of the same clinical severity, whether or not they could be defined AGA or SGA according to the neonatal standards. Neonatal curves are misleading in detecting low birth weight infants and should be used only when obstetric data are unavailable.

LEVEL OF EVIDENCE

II.

Fetal growth rates and the very preterm delivery of twins

OBJECTIVE

Our objective was to determine whether slow fetal growth rates and twin growth patterns from 20 weeks' gestation to delivery are associated with very preterm delivery.

STUDY DESIGN

Available charts were reviewed for twin pregnancies, delivered between 1979 and 2002, at 4 U.S. medical centers. The sample of 1612 pregnancies delivered at 28 week's gestation or greater and had at least 2 ultrasound evaluations of fetal size from 20 to 28 weeks or from 28 weeks to delivery for estimation of fetal growth rates (grams per week). Slow fetal growth (below the 10th percentile) was defined as less than 90 grams per week at 20-28 weeks and 168 g/week from 28 weeks to delivery. The main outcome measure was the timing of delivery.

RESULTS

Of the women delivering twins, 5.3% delivered extremely preterm (28-30 weeks), 8.5% very preterm (31-32 weeks), and 40.1% preterm (33-36 weeks). Patterns of growth for the pair were highly associated with very preterm delivery. Compared with neither growing slowly (1.7%), 4.9% delivered very preterm if only 1 twin grew slowly. Very preterm was 14.6% (adjusted odds ratio 9.81; 95% confidence interval, 3.50-27.48) with both growing slowly from 28 weeks on and 20.0% (adjusted odds ratio 15.04; 95% confidence interval 5.13-44.11) with both growing slowly over both intervals. Survival analyses indicated that twins with normal growth in both intervals remained undelivered for a significantly longer number of days (P < .0001) than pairs in which one or both twins were growing slowly.

CONCLUSION

Very preterm delivery of twins seems to be preceded by slowed or compromised fetal growth for the pair.

Pathophysiology of Fetal Growth Restriction: Implications for Diagnosis and Surveillance

Normal fetal growth depends on the genetically predetermined growth potential and is modulated by fetal, placental, maternal, and external factors. Fetuses with intrauterine growth restriction (IUGR) are at high risk for poor short- and long-term outcome. Although there are many underlying etiologies, IUGR resulting from placental insufficiency is most relevant clinically because outcome could be altered by appropriate diagnosis and timely delivery. A diagnostic approach that aims to separate IUGR resulting from placental disease from constitutionally small fetuses and those with other underlying etiologies (e.g., aneuploidy, viral infection, nonaneuploid syndromes) needs to integrate multiple imaging modalities. In placental-based IUGR, cardiovascular and behavioral responses are interrelated with the disease severity. Ultrasound assessment of fetal anatomy, amniotic fluid volume, and growth is complementary to the Doppler investigation of fetoplacental blood flow dynamics. A diagnostic approach to IUGR combining these modalities is presented in this review.

TARGET AUDIENCE

Obstetricians & Gynecologists, Family Physicians.

LEARNING OBJECTIVES

After completion of this article, the reader should be able to describe the development of the placental interface, to outline the mechanisms of placental insufficiency, and to list the manifestations of placental insufficiency and the tests that can be used to diagnose fetal growth restriction.