Predicting fetal weight by three-dimensional limb volume ultrasound (AVol/TVol) and abdominal circumference

Multivariable prediction models for fetal macrosomia and large for gestational age: A systematic review

BACKGROUND

The identification of large for gestational age (LGA) and macrosomic fetuses is essential for counselling and managing these pregnancies.

OBJECTIVES

To systematically review the literature for multivariable prediction models for LGA and macrosomia, assessing the performance, quality and applicability of the included model in clinical practice.

SEARCH STRATEGY

MEDLINE, EMBASE and Cochrane Library were searched until June 2022.

SELECTION CRITERIA

We included observational and experimental studies reporting the development and/or validation of any multivariable prediction model for fetal macrosomia and/or LGA. We excluded studies that used a single variable or did not evaluate model performance.

DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS

Data were extracted using the Checklist for critical appraisal and data extraction for systematic reviews of prediction modelling studies checklist. The model performance measures discrimination, calibration and validation were extracted. The quality and completion of reporting within each study was assessed by its adherence to the TRIPOD (Transparent Reporting of a multivariable prediction model for Individual Prognosis Or Diagnosis) checklist. The risk of bias and applicability were measured using PROBAST (Prediction model Risk Of Bias Assessment Tool).

MAIN RESULTS

A total of 8442 citations were identified, with 58 included in the analysis: 32/58 (55.2%) developed, 21/58 (36.2%) developed and internally validated and 2/58 (3.4%) developed and externally validated a model. Only three studies externally validated pre-existing models. Macrosomia and LGA were differentially defined by many studies. In total, 111 multivariable prediction models were developed using 112 different variables. Model discrimination was wide ranging area under the receiver operating characteristics curve (AUROC 0.56-0.96) and few studies reported calibration (11/58, 19.0%). Only 5/58 (8.6%) studies had a low risk of bias.

CONCLUSIONS

There are currently no multivariable prediction models for macrosomia/LGA that are ready for clinical implementation.

Role of fetal head-circumference-to-maternal-height ratio in predicting Cesarean section for labor dystocia: prospective multicenter study

OBJECTIVE

To evaluate the relationship between the fetal head-circumference-to-maternal-height (HC/MH) ratio measured shortly before delivery and the occurrence of Cesarean section (CS) for labor dystocia.

METHODS

This was a multicenter prospective cohort study involving four tertiary maternity hospitals. An unselected cohort of women with a singleton fetus in cephalic presentation, at a gestational age beyond 36 + 0 weeks and without any contraindication for vaginal delivery, was enrolled between September 2020 and November 2021. The MH and fetal HC were measured on admission of the patient to the labor ward. The primary outcome of the study was the performance of the HC/MH ratio in the prediction of CS for labor dystocia. Women who underwent CS for any indication other than failed labor progression, including fetal distress, were excluded from the final analysis.

RESULTS

A total of 783 women were included in the study. Vaginal delivery occurred in 744 (95.0%) women and CS for labor dystocia in 39 (5.0%). CS for labor dystocia was associated with shorter MH (mean ± SD, 160.4 ± 6.6 vs 164.5 ± 6.3 cm; P < 0.001), larger fetal HC (339.6 ± 9.5 vs 330.7 ± 13.0 mm; P < 0.001) and a higher HC/MH ratio (2.12 ± 0.11 vs 2.01 ± 0.10; P < 0.001) compared with vaginal delivery. Multivariate logistic regression analysis showed that the HC/MH ratio was associated independently with CS for labor dystocia (adjusted odds ratio, 2.65 (95% CI, 1.85-3.79); P < 0.001). The HC/MH ratio had an area under the receiver-operating-characteristics curve of 0.77 and an optimal cut-off value for discriminating between vaginal delivery and CS for labor dystocia of 2.09, which was associated with a sensitivity of 0.62 (95% CI, 0.45-0.77), specificity of 0.79 (95% CI, 0.76-0.82), positive predictive value of 0.13 (95% CI, 0.09-0.19) and negative predictive value of 0.98 (95% CI, 0.96-0.99).

CONCLUSIONS

In a large cohort of unselected pregnancies, the HC/MH ratio performed better than did fetal HC and MH alone in identifying those cases that will undergo CS for labor dystocia, albeit with moderate predictive value. The HC/MH ratio could assist in the evaluation of women at risk for CS for labor dystocia. © 2022 The Authors. Ultrasound in Obstetrics & Gynecology published by John Wiley & Sons Ltd on behalf of International Society of Ultrasound in Obstetrics and Gynecology.