Introduction of a customised growth chart protocol increased detection of small for gestational age pregnancies in a tertiary Melbourne hospital

Outcome-based comparative analysis of five fetal growth velocity models to define slow growth

OBJECTIVE

Fetal growth surveillance includes assessment of size as well as rate of growth, and various definitions for slow growth have been adopted into clinical use. The aim of this study was to evaluate the effectiveness of different models to identify stillbirth risk, in addition to risk represented by the fetus being small-for-gestational age (SGA).

METHODS

This was a retrospective analysis of a routinely collected and anonymized dataset of pregnancies that had two or more third-trimester ultrasound measurements of estimated fetal weight (EFW). SGA was defined as EFW < 10th customized centile, and slow growth was defined according to five published models in clinical use: (1) a fixed velocity limit of 20 g per day (FVL20 ); (2) a fixed > 50 centile drop, regardless of scan-measurement interval (FCD50 ); (3) a fixed > 30 centile drop, regardless of scan interval (FCD30 ); (4) growth trajectory slower than the third customized growth-centile limit (GCL3 ); and (5) EFW at second scan below the projected optimal weight range (POWR), based on partial receiver-operating-characteristics-curve-derived  cut-offs specific to the scan interval.

RESULTS

The study cohort consisted of 164 718 pregnancies with 480 592 third-trimester ultrasound scans (mean ± SD, 2.9 ± 0.9). The last two scans in each pregnancy were performed at an average gestational age of 33 + 5 and 37 + 1 weeks. At the last scan, 12 858 (7.8%) EFWs were SGA, and of these, 9359 were also SGA at birth (positive predictive value, 72.8%). The rate at which slow growth was defined varied considerably (FVL20 , 12.7%; FCD50 , 0.7%; FCD30 , 4.6%; GCL3 , 19.8%; POWR, 10.1%), and there was varying overlap between cases identified as having slow growth and those identified as SGA at the last scan. Only the POWR method identified additional non-SGA pregnancies with slow growth (11 237/16 671 (67.4%)) that had significant stillbirth risk (relative risk, 1.58 (95% CI, 1.04-2.39)). These non-SGA cases resulting in stillbirth had a median EFW centile of 52.6 at the last scan and a median weight centile of 27.3 at birth. Subgroup analysis identified methodological problems with the fixed-velocity model because it assumes linear growth throughout gestation, and with the centile-based methods because the non-parametric distribution of centiles at the extremes does not reflect actual difference in weight gain.

CONCLUSION

Comparative analysis of five clinically used methods to define slow fetal growth has shown that only the measurement-interval-specific POWR model can identify non-SGA fetuses with slow growth that are at increased risk of stillbirth. © 2023 The Authors. Ultrasound in Obstetrics & Gynecology published by John Wiley & Sons Ltd on behalf of International Society of Ultrasound in Obstetrics and Gynecology.

Effects of Intrauterine Growth Restriction (IUGR) on Growth and Body Composition Compared to Constitutionally Small Infants

(1) Intrauterine growth restriction (IUGR) is associated with multiple morbidities including growth restriction and impaired neurodevelopment. Small for gestational age (SGA) is defined as a birth weight <10th percentile, regardless of the etiology. The term is commonly used as a proxy for IUGR, but it may represent a healthy constitutionally small infant. Differentiating between IUGR and constitutionally small infants is essential for the nutritional management. (2) Infants born at <37 weeks of gestation between 2017 and 2022, who underwent body composition measurement (FFM: fat-free mass; FM: fat mass) at term-equivalent age, were included in this study. Infants with IUGR and constitutionally small infants (SGA) were compared to infants appropriate for gestational age (AGA). (3) A total of 300 infants (AGA: n = 249; IUGR: n = 40; SGA: n = 11) were analyzed. FFM (p < 0.001) and weight growth velocity (p = 0.022) were significantly lower in IUGR compared to AGA infants, but equal in SGA and AGA infants. FM was not significantly different between all groups. (4) The FFM Z-score was significantly lower in IUGR compared to AGA infants (p = 0.017). Being born constitutionally small compared to AGA had no impact on growth and body composition. These data showed that early aggressive nutritional management is essential in IUGR infants to avoid impaired growth and loss of FFM.

Characteristics associated with antenatally unidentified small-for-gestational-age fetuses: prospective cohort study nested within DESiGN randomized controlled trial

OBJECTIVE

To identify the clinical characteristics and patterns of ultrasound use amongst pregnancies with an antenatally unidentified small-for-gestational-age (SGA) fetus, compared with those in which SGA is identified, to understand how to design interventions that improve antenatal SGA identification.

METHODS

This was a prospective cohort study of singleton, non-anomalous SGA (birth weight < 10th centile) neonates born after 24 + 0 gestational weeks at 13 UK sites, recruited for the baseline period and control arm of the DESiGN trial. Pregnancy with antenatally unidentified SGA was defined if there was no scan or if the final scan showed estimated fetal weight (EFW) at the 10th centile or above. Identified SGA was defined if EFW was below the 10th centile at the last scan. Maternal and fetal sociodemographic and clinical characteristics were studied for associations with unidentified SGA using unadjusted and adjusted logistic regression models. Ultrasound parameters (gestational age at first growth scan, number and frequency of ultrasound scans) were described, stratified by presence of indication for serial ultrasound. Associations of unidentified SGA with absolute centile and percentage weight difference between the last scan and birth were also studied on unadjusted and adjusted logistic regression, according to time between the last scan and birth.

RESULTS

Of the 15 784 SGA babies included, SGA was not identified antenatally in 78.7% of cases. Of pregnancies with unidentified SGA, 47.1% had no recorded growth scan. Amongst 9410 pregnancies with complete data on key maternal comorbidities and antenatal complications, the risk of unidentified SGA was lower for women with any indication for serial scans (adjusted odds ratio (aOR), 0.56 (95% CI, 0.49-0.64)), for Asian compared with white women (aOR, 0.80 (95% CI, 0.69-0.93)) and for those with non-cephalic presentation at birth (aOR, 0.58 (95% CI, 0.46-0.73)). The risk of unidentified SGA was highest among women with a body mass index (BMI) of 25.0-29.9 kg/m2 (aOR, 1.15 (95% CI, 1.01-1.32)) and lowest in those with underweight BMI (aOR, 0.61 (95% CI, 0.48-0.76)) compared to women with BMI of 18.5-24.9 kg/m2 . Compared to women with identified SGA, those with unidentified SGA had fetuses of higher SGA birth-weight centile (adjusted odds for unidentified SGA increased by 1.21 (95% CI, 1.18-1.23) per one-centile increase between the 0th and 10th centiles). Duration between the last scan and birth increased with advancing gestation in pregnancies with unidentified SGA. SGA babies born within a week of the last growth scan had a mean difference between EFW and birth-weight centiles of 19.5 (SD, 13.8) centiles for the unidentified-SGA group and 0.2 (SD, 3.3) centiles for the identified-SGA group (adjusted mean difference between groups, 19.0 (95% CI, 17.8-20.1) centiles).

CONCLUSIONS

Unidentified SGA was more common amongst women without an indication for serial ultrasound, and in those with cephalic presentation at birth, BMI of 25.0-29.9 kg/m2 and less severe SGA. Ultrasound EFW was overestimated in women with unidentified SGA. This demonstrates the importance of improving the accuracy of SGA screening strategies in low-risk populations and continuing performance of ultrasound scans for term pregnancies. © 2022 The Authors. Ultrasound in Obstetrics & Gynecology published by John Wiley & Sons Ltd on behalf of International Society of Ultrasound in Obstetrics and Gynecology.

Evaluating the Growth Assessment Protocol for stillbirth prevention: progress and challenges

Many stillbirths are associated with fetal growth restriction, and are hence potentially avoidable. The Growth Assessment Protocol (GAP) is a multidisciplinary program with an evidence based care pathway, training in risk assessment, fetal growth surveillance with customised charts and rolling audit. Antenatal detection of small for gestational age (SGA) has become an indicator of quality of care. Evaluation is essential to understand the impact of such a prevention program. Randomised trials will not be effective if they cannot ensure proper implementation before assessment. Observational studies have allowed realistic evaluation in practice, with other factors excluded that may have influenced the outcome. An award winning 10 year study of stillbirth data in England has been able to assess the effect of GAP in isolation, and found a strong, causal association with improved antenatal detection of SGA babies, and the sustained decline in national stillbirth rates. The challenge now is to apply this program more widely in low and middle income settings where the main global burden of stillbirth is, and to adapt it to local needs and resources.

Impact of introduction of the growth assessment protocol in a South Indian tertiary hospital on SGA detection, stillbirth rate and neonatal outcome

OBJECTIVES

India has a high rate of stillbirths, and many deaths are due to fetal growth restriction and potentially preventable. Screening and identification of the small for gestational age (SGA) fetus during the antenatal period has been shown to reduce stillbirths. We set out to evaluate the impact of implementing the Growth Assessment Protocol (GAP), a programme designed for screening for SGA.

METHODS

Observational study comparing two-time epochs; before (years 2011-2014) and after (years 2015-2018) introduction of GAP. The programme includes identification of risk factors, risk categorization, serial fundal height measurement, customised fetal growth charts and appropriate referral protocols. Fetal growth charts and birth centiles were generated based on the hospital database of normal outcome pregnancies, customised to women's ethnicity, parity, height, and weight. The protocol was introduced following training of obstetric and midwifery care providers. We evaluated SGA detection rates, stillbirth rates (from 28 weeks) and neonatal morbidity at term.

RESULTS

There were 26,199 and 31,498 births, with 115 and 108 stillbirths in the pre and post-GAP implementation periods, respectively. SGA detection rates increased from 51.1 to 67.1%, representing a 31% improvement (p<0.001). Overall stillbirth rates declined from 4.4 to 3.4 per 1000 births (RR 0.78 CI 95% 0.60-1.02) and at term from 1.5 to 0.6 (RR 0.37 CI 95% 0.20-0.66). Neonatal intensive care admission and neonatal encephalopathy in term neonates also decreased significantly.

CONCLUSIONS

Introduction of the GAP programme in an Indian tertiary maternity service was associated with improved antenatal detection of SGA and reduced stillbirth rates and neonatal morbidity.

Fetal weight projection model to define growth velocity and validation against pregnancy outcome in a cohort of serially scanned pregnancies

OBJECTIVE

Fetal growth assessment is central to good antenatal care, yet there is a lack of definition of normal and abnormal fetal growth rate which can identify pregnancies at risk of adverse outcome. The aim of this study was to develop and test a model for defining normal limits of growth velocity which are specific to the fetal weight measurement interval.

METHODS

The cohort consisted of 102 138 singleton pregnancies which underwent at least two third-trimester measurements of ultrasound estimated fetal weight (EFW), usually carried out because routine early-pregnancy risk assessment had indicated an increased risk of fetal growth restriction. We projected the EFW from the first of each consecutive measurement pair along its own centile rank to the gestational age of the second scan. Normal growth was defined as the second EFW being within a weight range based on limits derived by partial receiver-operating-characteristics-curve (pROC) analyses for small-for-gestational-age (SGA; < 10^th  centile) and large-for-gestational-age (LGA; > 90^th  centile) birth weight. The limits were measurement-interval specific and calculated for a fixed false-positive rate (FPR) of 10%. The resultant normal, slow and accelerated growth rates calculated from consecutive EFW pairs were evaluated against the following predefined perinatal outcome measures: stillbirth, neonatal death, SGA and LGA at birth, 5-min Apgar score < 7 and admission to the neonatal intensive care unit. Slow growth based on the last two scans was compared with SGA fetal weight (EFW < 10^th  centile) at the last scan and association with stillbirth risk was assessed, expressed as relative risk (RR) with 95% CI.

RESULTS

The optimal cut-off limits for normal growth rate between consecutive scans varied according to the length of the measurement interval, with an average of -8.0% for slow growth and + 9.3% for accelerated growth at a fixed FPR of 10%. Slow growth between random consecutive scan pairs was associated significantly with all predefined outcome measures including stillbirth (RR, 2.19; 95% CI, 1.84-2.53) and neonatal death (RR, 2.28; 95% CI, 1.60-3.13). Accelerated growth was associated with LGA at birth (RR, 2.15; 95% CI, 2.10-2.20), while normal growth was protective of all adverse outcome measures. Slow growth between the last two scans (which were performed at a median gestational age of 33 + 1 to 36 + 4 weeks) and SGA at the last scan were each predictors of stillbirth, and stillbirth risk was highest when both were present (RR, 2.65; 95% CI, 1.67-4.20). However, 66.2% of pregnancies with slow growth were not SGA at the last scan and these cases also had an increased risk of stillbirth (RR, 2.07; 95% CI, 1.40-3.05).

CONCLUSION

Fetal growth velocity defined by projected, measurement-interval specific fetal weight limits is associated independently with perinatal outcome and should be used for antenatal surveillance in addition to assessment by fetal size. © 2022 The Authors. Ultrasound in Obstetrics & Gynecology published by John Wiley & Sons Ltd on behalf of International Society of Ultrasound in Obstetrics and Gynecology.

Detection of small for gestational age babies and perinatal outcomes following implementation of the Growth Assessment Protocol at a New Zealand tertiary facility: An observational intervention study

BACKGROUND

Timely detection of small for gestational age (SGA) fetuses is important for reducing severe perinatal morbidity and mortality, and better tools are needed to detect SGA in maternity care.

AIM

We evaluated the effect of the introduction of the Perinatal Institute's Growth Assessment Protocol (GAP) in the Counties Manukau Health region, South Auckland, New Zealand, on antenatal detection of SGA and maternal and perinatal outcomes.

MATERIALS AND METHODS

Uncontrolled before and after study in women booked under hospital community midwife care with a singleton, non-anomalous pregnancy. Antenatal detection of SGA (birthweight <10th customised centile) was compared pre-GAP (2012, N = 1105) and post-GAP (2017, N = 1082). Composite adverse neonatal outcome was defined as neonatal unit admission >48 h, five-minute Apgar score <7, and/or any ventilation. Analyses were adjusted for maternal age, body mass index, deprivation, smoking and ethnicity.

RESULTS

SGA rates were similar across epochs (13.8% vs 12.9%) but antenatal detection of SGA increased from 22.9% (35/153) to 57.9% (81/140) post-GAP (adjusted odds ratio (aOR) = 4.8, 95% CI 2.82-8.18). Rates of induction of labour and caesarean section increased between epochs but were similar in SGA, non-SGA, and detected and non-detected SGA subgroups. Among SGA babies, there was some evidence that antenatal detection of SGA may be associated with lower composite adverse neonatal outcome (detected SGA: aOR 0.44 95% CI 0.17-1.15; non-detected SGA: aOR = 1.81 95% CI 0.73-4.48; interaction P = 0.03). Pre-term birth did not appear to be influenced by GAP.

CONCLUSION

Implementation of GAP was associated with a nearly five-fold increase in SGA detection without increasing obstetric intervention for SGA.

Precision Diagnostics by Affinity-Mass Spectrometry: A Novel Approach for Fetal Growth Restriction Screening During Pregnancy

Fetal growth restriction (FGR) affects about 3% to 8% of pregnancies, leading to higher perinatal mortality and morbidity. Current strategies for detecting fetal growth impairment are based on ultrasound inspections. However, antenatal detection rates are insufficient and critical in countries with substandard care. To overcome difficulties with detection and to better discriminate between high risk FGR and low risk small for gestational age (SGA) fetuses, we investigated the suitability of risk assessment based on the analysis of a recently developed proteome profile derived from maternal serum in different study groups. Maternal serum, collected at around 31 weeks of gestation, was analyzed in 30 FGR, 15 SGA, and 30 control (CTRL) pregnant women who delivered between 31 and 40 weeks of gestation. From the 75 pregnant women of this study, 2 were excluded because of deficient raw data and 2 patients could not be grouped due to indeterminate results. Consistency between proteome profile and sonography results was obtained for 59 patients (26 true positive and 33 true negative). Of the proteome profiling 12 contrarious grouped individuals, 3 were false negative and 9 were false positive cases with respect to ultrasound data. Both true positive and false positive grouping transfer the respective patients to closer surveillance and thorough pregnancy management. Accuracy of the test is considered high with an area-under-curve value of 0.88 in receiver-operator-characteristics analysis. Proteome profiling by affinity-mass spectrometry during pregnancy provides a reliable method for risk assessment of impaired development in fetuses and consumes just minute volumes of maternal peripheral blood. In addition to clinical testing proteome profiling by affinity-mass spectrometry may improve risk assessment, referring pregnant women to specialists early, thereby improving perinatal outcomes.

Student midwives' perception of the growth assessment protocol (GAP): Preparation for clinical practice

Fetal growth restriction is a major complication of pregnancy and increases the risk of stillbirth. Midwives screen for fetal wellbeing by measuring the symphysis fundal height to detect growth restriction, which can present in a low risk pregnancy or occur late in gestational age. The detection, surveillance and onward referral of these pregnancies are the responsibility of all midwives. To prevent avoidable stillbirth due to restricted fetal growth and to ensure safe, evidence based practice, the Perinatal Institute developed the Growth Assessment Protocol (GAP). A qualitative study using semi-structured interviews was conducted to explore 2nd year student midwives' perception of the GAP training and its impact on their clinical practice. Data was analysed and four main themes were identified using interpretative phenomenological analysis. The findings from the study show that the participants viewed the GAP training as 'authentic' and commented on the alignment with contemporary practice for the detection and surveillance of at risk pregnancies. The findings suggest that GAP training for pre-registration student midwives has the potential to provide a sustainable workforce, prepared to meet the World Health Organisation's global strategy for eliminating avoidable stillbirth by 2030.

Could masking gestational age estimation during scanning improve detection of small-for-gestational-age fetuses? A controlled pre-post evaluation

BACKGROUND

Antenatal detection of small-for-gestational-age fetuses improves outcomes and reduces perinatal mortality rates. However, ultrasonographic estimation of fetal weight is subject to several potential sources of error. One potential source of error is subconscious operator bias towards "normal" measurement values for gestational age (observer-expectancy bias).

OBJECTIVE

We aimed to determine whether the sensitivity of small-for-gestational-age detection is improved by removing real-time display of estimated gestational age during measurement of the abdominal circumference in the third trimester.

STUDY DESIGN

This retrospective evaluation (November 2014-May 2018 inclusive) included all singleton infants liveborn at ≥28 weeks gestation in a single United Kingdom obstetrics center. In the preintervention phase, real-time estimated gestational age was displayed to sonographers as they measured fetal abdominal circumference (the key determinant of estimated fetal weight with the use of the INTERGROWTH 21st fetal weight equation) in the third trimester. In the postintervention phase, real-time gestational age information was removed on selected ultrasound machines. Accuracy of birthweight percentile estimation was assessed before and after intervention, both in the full cohort comprising all eligible scans and in a subcohort that was scanned within 4 weeks of delivery. We assessed the accuracy of small-for-gestational-age detection using the sensitivity, positive likelihood ratio, and area under the receiver-operator curve.

RESULTS

Of the 18,342 eligible pregnancies, 9342 (51%) had a third-trimester growth scan. The sensitivity of ultrasonographic estimation of fetal weight for antenatal detection of small-for-gestational-age babies did not change significantly between the before and after intervention phases (31.5% confidence interval, 27.1-36.2 vs 31.7% confidence interval, 20.2-45.0). Although the sensitivity for small-for-gestational-age detection was higher in the subcohort that was scanned within 4 weeks of delivery than in the full cohort (P<.001), there was no significant difference between the before and after intervention phases (58% confidence interval, 50-66 vs 65% confidence interval, 43-84). With the use of an estimation of the abdominal circumference percentile rather than estimated fetal weight percentile significantly decreased the sensitivity for small-for-gestational-age detection in all groups (P<.01), but there was no difference between the before and after intervention phases.

CONCLUSION

Blinding operators to the estimated gestation of the fetus during abdominal circumference measurement does not significantly alter the antenatal detection rate of small-for-gestational-age babies. The observer-expectancy effect is therefore unlikely to be a significant contributor to the error that is associated with ultrasonographic estimation of fetal weight.