Prenatal prediction of significant intertwin birthweight discordance using standard second and third trimester sonographic parameters

Ultrasound for diagnosis of birth weight discordance in twin pregnancies

BACKGROUND

There is a need to standardize monitoring in obstetric research of twin pregnancies. Identification of birth weight discordance (BWD), defined as a difference in the birth weights of twins, is a well-documented phenomenon in twin pregnancies. Ultrasound for the diagnosis of BWD informs complex decision making including whether to intervene medically (via laser photo coagulation) or deliver the twins to avoid fetal morbidities or even death. The question is, how accurate is this measurement?

OBJECTIVES

To determine the diagnostic accuracy (sensitivity and specificity) of ultrasound estimated fetal weight discordance (EFWD) of 20% and 25% using different estimated biometric ultrasound measurements compared with the actual BWD as the reference standard in twin pregnancies.

SEARCH METHODS

The search for this review was performed on 15 March 2019. We searched CENTRAL, MEDLINE (Ovid), Embase (Ovid), seven other databases, conference proceedings, reference lists and contacted experts. There were no language or date restrictions applied to the electronic searches, and no methodological filters to maximize sensitivity.

SELECTION CRITERIA

We selected cohort-type studies with delayed verification that evaluated the accuracy of biometric measurements at ultrasound scanning of twin pregnancies that had been proposed for the diagnosis of estimated BWD, compared to BWD measurements after birth as a reference standard. In addition, we only selected studies that considered twin pregnancies and applied a reference standard for EFWD for the target condition of BWD.

DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS

We screened all titles generated by electronic database searches. Two review authors independently assessed the abstracts of all potentially relevant studies. We assessed the identified full papers for eligibility, and extracted data to create 2 × 2 tables. Two review authors independently performed quality assessment using the QUADAS-2 tool. We excluded studies that did not report data in sufficient detail to construct 2 × 2 tables, and where this information was not available from the primary investigators. We assessed the certainty of the evidence using the GRADE approach.

MAIN RESULTS

We included 39 eligible studies with a median study sample size of 140. In terms of risk of bias, there were many unclear statements regarding patient selection, index test and use of proper reference standard. Twenty-one studies (53%) were of methodological concern due to flow and timing. In terms of applicability, most studies were of low concern. Ultrasound for diagnosis of BWD in twin pregnancies at 20% cut-off Twenty-two studies provided data for a BWD of 20% and the summary estimate of sensitivity was 0.51 (95% CI 0.42 to 0.60), and the summary estimate of specificity was 0.91 (95% CI 0.89 to 0.93) (8005 twin pregnancies; very low-certainty evidence). Ultrasound for diagnosis of BWD in twin pregnancies at 25% cut-off Eighteen studies provided data using a BWD discordance of 25%. The summary estimate of sensitivity was 0.46 (95% CI 0.26 to 0.66), and the summary estimate of specificity was 0.93 (95% CI 0.89 to 0.96) (6471 twin pregnancies; very low-certainty evidence). Subgroup analyses were possible for both BWD of 20% and 25%. The diagnostic accuracy did not differ substantially between estimation by abdominal circumference and femur length but femur length had a trend towards higher sensitivity and specificity. Subgroup analyses were not possible by sex of twins, chorionicity or gestational age due to insufficient data.

AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS

Very low-certainty evidence suggests that EFWD identified by ultrasound has low sensitivity but good specificity in detecting BWD in twin pregnancies. There is uncertain diagnostic value of EFWD; this review suggests there is insufficient evidence to support this index as the sole measure for clinical decision making to evaluate the prognosis of twins with growth discordance. The diagnostic accuracy of other measures including amniotic fluid index and umbilical artery Doppler resistive indices in combination with ultrasound for clinical intervention requires evaluation. Future well-designed studies could also evaluate the impact of chorionicity, sex and gestational age in the diagnostic accuracy of ultrasound for EFWD.

Predictive value of prenatal ultrasound parameters for dichorionic growth discordant twins

BACKGROUND

Twin growth discordance was demonstrated to be a risk factor for adverse perinatal outcomes, and prenatal ultrasonographic methods were utilized to predict twin growth discordance to improve outcomes. The results currently reported are not consistent due to the poor unified parameters and gestational durations.

METHODS

A total of 71 dichorionic twins with growth discordance and 346 dichorionic twins with normal growth were respectively included in the retrospective cohort study. The weight discordance of more than 25% was defined as a "growth discordant twin". The clinical baseline information, maternal outcomes, twin birth weights and fetal growth parameters (which were measured by ultrasound) were compared between the two groups from early gestation to late gestation. Multiple logistic regression and receiver operating characteristic curves were adopted to evaluate the predictive value of the growth parameters.

RESULTS

Compared with normal dichorionic twins, the clinical baseline conditions were similar in the twins those finally developed growth discordance. The fetal growth parameters and the deepest volume pocket of amniotic fluid in early and mid-pregnancy showed no obvious predictive values. The fetal growth parameters in late pregnancy showed predictive values, especially the discordance of estimated fetal weight (EFW) in the early third-trimester (P < 0.001, area under the curve, 0.822; the cut-off value, 20%; sensitivity, 66.67%; specificity, 91.30%; positive predictive value, 88.46%).

CONCLUSION

Two assessment approaches were suggested and adopted to predict twin growth discordance in the current study. Twin growth should be assessed longitudinally and dynamically. Normal twins may show growth imbalance in the early stage. The discordance of EFW in late pregnancy may be a useful indicator for a growth discordance of more than 25%, which is required further confirmation.

Intrauterine growth discordance across gestation and birthweight discordance in dichorionic twins

BACKGROUND

Although intertwin size difference is an important measure of fetal growth, the appropriate cut point to define discordance is unclear. Few studies have assessed intertwin differences in estimated fetal weight longitudinally or in relation to size differences at birth.

OBJECTIVES

The objectives of the study were to estimate the magnitude of percentage differences in estimated fetal weight across gestation in dichorionic twins in relation to a fixed discordance cut point and compare classification of aberrant fetal growth by different measures (estimated fetal weight differences, birthweight discordance, small for gestational age).

STUDY DESIGN

Women aged 18-45 years from 8 US centers with dichorionic twin pregnancies at 8 weeks 0 days to 13 weeks 6 days gestation planning to deliver in participating hospitals were recruited into the Eunice Kennedy Shriver National Institute of Child Health and Human Development Fetal Growth Studies-Dichorionic Twins study and followed through delivery (n = 140; 2012-2013). Ultrasounds were conducted at 6 targeted study visits to obtain fetal biometrics and calculate estimated fetal weight. Percent estimated fetal weight and birthweight differences were calculated: ([weight_larger - weight_smaller]/weight_larger)*100; discordance was defined as ≥18% for illustration. Birth sizes for gestational age (both, 1, or neither small for gestational age) were determined; twins were categorized into combined birthweight plus small for gestational age groups: birthweight discordance ≥18% (yes, no) with both, 1, or neither small for gestational age. Linear mixed-models estimated percentiles of estimated fetal weight percent differences across gestation and compared estimated fetal weight differences between combined birthweight discordance and small for gestational age groups. A Fisher exact test compared birthweight discordance and small for gestational age classifications.

RESULTS

Median estimated fetal weight percentage difference increased across gestation (5.9% at 15.0, 8.4% at 38.0 weeks), with greater disparities at higher percentiles (eg, 90th percentile: 15.6% at 15.0, 26.3% at 38.0 weeks). As gestation advanced, an increasing percentage of pregnancies were classified as discordant using a fixed cut point: 10% at 27.0, 15% at 34.0, and 20% at 38.0 weeks. Birthweight discordance and small for gestational age classifications differed (P = .002); for birthweight discordance ≥18% vs <18%: 44% vs 71% had neither small for gestational age; 56% vs 18% had 1 small for gestational age; no cases (0%) vs 11% had both small for gestational age, respectively. Estimated fetal weight percent difference varied across gestation by birthweight discordance plus small for gestational age classification (P = .040). Estimated fetal weight percentage difference increased with birthweight discordance ≥18% (neither small for gestational age: 0.46%/week [95% confidence interval, 0.08-0.84]; 1 small for gestational age: 0.57%/week [95% confidence interval, 0.25-0.90]) but less so without birthweight discordance (neither small for gestational age: 0.17%/week [95% confidence interval, 0.06-0.28]; 1 small for gestational age: 0.03%/week [95% confidence interval, -0.17 to 0.24]); both small for gestational age: 0.10%/week [95% confidence interval, -0.15 to 0.36]).

CONCLUSION

The percentage of dichorionic pregnancies exceeding a fixed discordance cut point increased over gestation. A fixed cut point for defining twin discordance would identify an increasing percentage of twins as discordant as gestation advances. Small for gestational age and percentage weight differences assess distinct aspects of dichorionic twin growth. A percentile cut point may be more clinically useful for defining discordance, although further study is required to assess whether any specific percentile cut point correlates to adverse outcomes.

How does gestational age affect growth and body composition of preterm twins?

BACKGROUND

Twins experience altered growth compared to singletons. The primary aim of this study was to compare growth and body composition (BC) of twin and singleton preterm infants from birth to 3 months according to gestational age (GA). Secondary aims were to evaluate the effect of chorionicity and mode of feeding on twins' BC.

METHODS

Anthropometric measurements and BC were performed at term and 3 months in preterm infants (GA < 37 weeks). Infants were categorized as: extremely, very, moderate and late preterm infants. Chorionicity was assigned as monochorionic, dichorionic or multichorionic. Mode of feeding was recorded as any human milk feeding vs formula feeding.

RESULTS

Five hundred and seventy-six preterm infants were included (223 twins). Late-preterm twins were lighter and shorter at each study point; fat-free mass (FFM) was lower in these infants at each study point, compared to singletons. No differences were found between twins and singleton on the other category. Multichorionic infants had an FFM deficit compared to monochorionic and dichorionic at term, whereas no differences were found at 3 months. FFM at term was negatively associated with being twin and formula-fed.

CONCLUSIONS

Twins and singletons born before 34 weeks' GA showed similar anthropometry and BC. Conversely, twin late-preterm infants showed different growth and BC compared to singletons.

Associations between estimated foetal weight discordance and clinical characteristics within dichorionic twins: The NICHD Fetal Growth Studies

BACKGROUND

Birthweight discordance is well studied, with less known about longitudinal inter-twin differences in foetal growth.

OBJECTIVE

To examine inter-twin per cent differences in EFW (EFW_% ), head (HC_% ) and abdominal circumference (AC_% ), and femur length (FL_% ) across gestation in dichorionic twin gestations and explore associated characteristics.

METHODS

Foetal biometrics were assessed by ultrasound and EFW calculated at ≤6 study visits among women with dichorionic twin pregnancies enrolled in the NICHD Fetal Growth Studies cohort (US, 2012-2013). Inter-twin per cent difference was defined: ([Size_{larger twin}  - Size_{smaller twin} ]/Size_{larger twin}  × 100). Linear mixed models evaluated per cent differences in foetal biometrics at 15 weeks and their change per week overall and by maternal/neonatal characteristics in unadjusted and adjusted models.

RESULTS

In 140 pregnancies, inter-twin per cent differences increased across gestation for EFW (0.18%/week, 95% confidence interval [CI] 0.10, 0.27), HC (0.03%/week, 95% CI 0.00, 0.06), and AC (0.03%/week, 95%CI -0.01, 0.08) but decreased for FL (-0.03%/week, 95% CI -0.09, 0.02). After adjustment, change in EFW_% difference across gestation differed by pre-pregnancy body mass index (BMI [kg/m² ]; underweight [<18.5]; normal weight [18.5-24.9]; overweight [25.0-29.9]; obese [≥30.0]; P_interaction  = .022); and conception method (in vitro fertilisation [IVF], intrauterine insemination, ovulation induction medication, donor egg/embryo, none; P_interaction  = .060). While EFW_% difference increased with normal pre-pregnancy BMI (0.24%/week, 95% CI 0.12, 0.37), little change was noted with pre-pregnancy obesity (0.01%/week, 95% CI -0.15, 0.17). EFW_% difference increased in conceptions without fertility treatments (0.23%/week, 95% CI 0.11, 0.34) but not IVF conceptions (-0.00%/week, 95% CI -0.16, 0.16). Similar patterns of differences across gestation were noted for HC_% by conception method (P_interaction  = .026) and AC_% by pre-pregnancy BMI (P_interaction  = .071); changes in HC_% differed by parity (nulliparous, multiparous; P_interaction  = .004).

CONCLUSIONS

EFW_% difference increased across gestation in dichorionic twins, but remained stable with pre-pregnancy obesity or IVF conception, patterns mirrored for HC and AC. Research is needed to understand pathologic versus physiologic differential twin growth trajectories.

The use of magnetic resonance imaging in the prediction of birthweight

Extremes of fetal growth can increase adverse pregnancy outcomes, and this is equally applicable to single and multiple gestations. Traditionally, these cases have been identified using simple two-dimensional ultrasound which is quite limited by its low precision. Magnetic resonance imaging (MRI) has now been used for many years in obstetrics, mainly as an adjunct to ultrasound for congenital abnormalities and increasingly as part of the post-mortem examination. However, MRI can also be used to accurately assess fetal weight as first demonstrated by Baker et al in 1994, using body volumes rather than standard biometric measurements. This publication was followed by several others, all of which confirmed the superiority of MRI; however, despite this initial promise, the technique has never been successfully integrated into clinical practice. In this review, we provide an overview of the literature, detail the various techniques and formulas currently available, discuss the applicability to specific high-risk groups and present our vision for the future of MRI within clinical obstetrics.

Magnetic resonance imaging for prenatal estimation of birthweight in pregnancy: review of available data, techniques, and future perspectives

Fetuses at the extremes of growth abnormalities carry a risk of perinatal morbidity and death. Their identification traditionally is done by 2-dimensional ultrasound imaging, the performance of which is not always optimal. Magnetic resonance imaging superbly depicts fetal anatomy and anomalies and has contributed largely to the evaluation of high-risk pregnancies. In 1994, magnetic resonance imaging was introduced for the estimation of fetal weight, which is done by measuring the fetal body volume and converting it through a formula to fetal weight. Approximately 10 studies have shown that magnetic resonance imaging is more accurate than 2-dimensional ultrasound imaging in the estimation of fetal weight. Yet, despite its promise, the magnetic resonance imaging technique currently is not implemented clinically. Over the last 5 years, this technique has evolved quite rapidly. Here, we review the literature data, provide details of the various measurement techniques and formulas, consider the application of the magnetic resonance imaging technique in specific populations such as patients with diabetes mellitus and twin pregnancies, and conclude with what we believe could be the future perspectives and clinical application of this challenging technique. The estimation of fetal weight by ultrasound imaging is based mainly on an algorithm that takes into account the measurement of biparietal diameter, head circumference, abdominal circumference, and femur length. The estimation of fetal weight by magnetic resonance imaging is based on one of the 2 formulas: (1) magnetic resonance imaging-the estimation of fetal weight (in kilograms)=1.031×fetal body volume (in liters)+0.12 or (2) magnetic resonance imaging-the estimation of fetal weight (in grams)=1.2083×fetal body volume (in milliliters)ˆ0.9815. Comparison of these 2 formulas for the detection of large-for-gestational age neonates showed similar performance for preterm (P=.479) and for term fetuses (P=1.000). Literature data show that the estimation of fetal weight with magnetic resonance imaging carries a mean or median relative error of 2.6 up to 3.7% when measurements were performed at <1 week from delivery; whereas for the same fetuses, the relative error at 2-dimensional ultrasound imaging varied between 6.3% and 11.4%. Further, in a series of 270 fetuses who were evaluated within 48 hours from birth and for a fixed false-positive rate of 10%, magnetic resonance imaging detected 98% of large-for-gestational age neonates (≥95th percentile for gestation) compared with 67% with ultrasound imaging estimates. For the same series, magnetic resonance imaging applied to the detection of small-for-gestational age neonates ≤10th percentile for gestation, for a fixed 10% false-positive rate, reached a detection rate of 100%, compared with only 78% for ultrasound imaging. Planimetric measurement has been 1 of the main limitations of magnetic resonance imaging for the estimation of fetal weight. Software programs that allow semiautomatic segmentation of the fetus are available from imaging manufacturers or are self-developed. We have shown that all of them perform equally well for the prediction of large-for-gestational age neonates, with the advantage of the semiautomatic methods being less time-consuming. Although many challenges remain for this technique to be generalized, a 2-step strategy after the selection of a group who are at high risk of the extremes of growth abnormalities is the most likely scenario. Results of ongoing studies are awaited (ClinicalTrials.gov Identifier # NCT02713568).

Placental T2* estimated by magnetic resonance imaging and fetal weight estimated by ultrasound in the prediction of birthweight differences in dichorionic twin pairs

INTRODUCTION

Intertwin birthweight (BW) difference is associated with an increased risk of adverse outcome. Ultrasound estimated fetal weight (EFW) is the current method to predict intertwin BW difference, however, the sensitivity is poor. Therefore, new methods are needed. Placental T2* estimated by magnetic resonance imaging (MRI) provides non-invasive information about the placental function. This study aimed to investigate placental T2* difference as a new predictor of BW difference, and to compare it to the EFW.

METHODS

We included 25 dichorionic twin pairs at 19-38 weeks' gestation. Placental T2* was obtained by MRI and EFW by ultrasound. Correlations between each predictor and BW difference were examined by simple linear regression, and the combined model was analyzed by multiple linear regression and likelihood ratio test.

RESULTS

Strong positive correlations were demonstrated between intertwin differences in placental T2* and BW (r = 0.80, p < 0.005), and EFW and BW (r = 0.64, p < 0.005). Placental T2* difference was a strong independent predictor of BW difference (p < 0.001), and the combined model performed better than each predictor alone (p < 0.0001).

DISCUSSION

This pilot study demonstrates that placental T2* difference may be a predictor of intertwin BW difference irrespectively of fetal size. The clinical potential of this method deserves further investigation in a larger clinical study.

The value of ultrasound in predicting isolated inter-twin discordance and adverse perinatal outcomes

PURPOSE

To investigate the value of ultrasound approaching delivery to predict isolated inter-twin discordance and adverse perinatal outcomes.

METHODS

We retrospectively included twin pregnancies with sonography approaching delivery in ten maternal-foetal medicine centres in China from 2013 to 2014. Estimated foetal weight (EFW) and inter-twin EFW disparity (EFWD) were calculated based on biometry parameters. Percentage errors between EFW and actual birthweight or between EFWD and actual inter-twin disparity were calculated. ROC curves and multiple logistic regression were applied to evaluate the ability of EFWD to predict inter-twin disparity ≥ 25%, stillbirth, asphyxia and admission to a neonatal intensive unit (NICU). Chorionicity-stratified analysis was further performed.

RESULTS

Two hundred sixty-six monochorionic and 760 dichorionic twin pregnancies were analysed. The percentage errors in foetal weight estimations were 7-13%, whereas percentage errors in the estimation of inter-twin disparity were nearly 100%. Among eight formulas, Hadlock1 performed best, with a detectable rate of 65% and a false positive rate of 5% when predicting inter-twin disparity ≥ 25%. EFWD ≥ 22% was strongly associated with stillbirth (OR = 4.17, 95% CI 1.40-12.40) and NICU admission (OR = 3.48, 95% CI 2.03-5.97) after adjustment for gestational age, parity and abnormal umbilical systolic/diastolic ratio. Ultrasound had better predictive ability in monochorionic twins.

CONCLUSION

The predictive value of ultrasound for isolated inter-twin discordance and adverse perinatal outcomes was limited, which was possibly due to the magnifying of systematic errors in the disparity estimation compared with weight estimation. Despite this, abnormal biometry was an independent contributor for the poor prognosis of neonates.

Selective IUGR in dichorionic twins: what can Doppler assessment and growth discordancy say about neonatal outcomes?

OBJECTIVE

The aim of the present study was to assess, in a population of dichorionic twin pregnancies with selective growth restriction, the effect of inter-twin differences by use of Doppler velocimetry and fetal growth discordancy on perinatal outcomes.

METHODS

This was a retrospective study including dichorionic twin pregnancies from January 2008 to December 2015 at the Department of Obstetrics and Gynecology of Fondazione MBBM. Only dichorionic twin pregnancies affected by selective intrauterine growth restriction (IUGR) delivering at ≥24 weeks were included in the study.

RESULTS

We found that twin pregnancies with inter-twin estimated fetal weight (EFW) discordance ≥15% were significantly associated with a higher risk of preterm delivery before 32 (P=0.004) and 34 weeks (P=0.04). Similarly, twin pregnancies with inter-twin abdominal circumference (AC) discordance ≥30° centiles were associated with a higher rate of neonatal intensive care unit (NICU) admission (P=0.02), neonatal resuscitation (P=0.02) and adverse neonatal composite outcome (P=0.04). Of interest, when comparing twin pregnancies according to Doppler study, growth restricted twins had a higher rate of composite neonatal outcome and in multivariate analysis, an abnormal Doppler was an independent risk factor for this outcome.

CONCLUSIONS

Our study associated growth discrepancy with specific pregnancy outcomes, according to defined cut-offs. In addition, we demonstrated that an abnormal umbilical artery Doppler is independently associated with a composite neonatal adverse outcome in growth restricted fetuses.

Comparison of conventional 2D ultrasound to magnetic resonance imaging for prenatal estimation of birthweight in twin pregnancy

BACKGROUND

During prenatal follow-up of twin pregnancies, accurate identification of birthweight and birthweight discordance is important to identify the high-risk group and plan perinatal care. Unfortunately, prenatal evaluation of birthweight discordance by 2-dimensional ultrasound has been far from optimal.

OBJECTIVE

The objective of the study was to prospectively compare estimates of fetal weight based on 2-dimensional ultrasound (ultrasound-estimated fetal weight) and magnetic resonance imaging (magnetic resonance-estimated fetal weight) with actual birthweight in women carrying twin pregnancies.

STUDY DESIGN

Written informed consent was obtained for this ethics committee-approved study. Between September 2011 and December 2015 and within 48 hours before delivery, ultrasound-estimated fetal weight and magnetic resonance-estimated fetal weight were conducted in 66 fetuses deriving from twin pregnancies at 34.3-39.0 weeks; gestation. Magnetic resonance-estimated fetal weight derived from manual measurement of fetal body volume. Comparison of magnetic resonance-estimated fetal weight and ultrasound-estimated fetal weight measurements vs birthweight was performed by calculating parameters as described by Bland and Altman. Receiver-operating characteristic curves were constructed for the prediction of small-for-gestational-age neonates using magnetic resonance-estimated fetal weight and ultrasound-estimated fetal weight. For twins 1 and 2 separately, the relative error or percentage error was calculated as follows: (birthweight - ultrasound-estimated fetal weight (or magnetic resonance-estimated fetal weight)/birthweight) × 100 (percentage). Furthermore, ultrasound-estimated fetal weight, magnetic resonance-estimated fetal weight, and birthweight discordance were calculated as 100 × (larger estimated fetal weight-smaller estimated fetal weight)/larger estimated fetal weight. The ultrasound-estimated fetal weight discordance and the birthweight discordance were correlated using linear regression analysis and Pearson's correlation coefficient. The same was done between the magnetic resonance-estimated fetal weight and birthweight discordance. To compare data, the χ², McNemar test, Student t test, and Wilcoxon signed rank test were used as appropriate. We used the Fisher r-to-z transformation to compare correlation coefficients.

RESULTS

The bias and the 95% limits of agreement of ultrasound-estimated fetal weight are 2.99 (-19.17% to 25.15%) and magnetic resonance-estimated fetal weight 0.63 (-9.41% to 10.67%). Limits of agreement were better between magnetic resonance-estimated fetal weight and actual birthweight as compared with the ultrasound-estimated fetal weight. Of the 66 newborns, 27 (40.9%) were of weight of the 10th centile or less and 21 (31.8%) of the fifth centile or less. The area under the receiver-operating characteristic curve for prediction of birthweight the 10th centile or less by prenatal ultrasound was 0.895 (P < .001; SE, 0.049), and by magnetic resonance imaging it was 0.946 (P < .001; SE, 0.024). Pairwise comparison of receiver-operating characteristic curves showed a significant difference between the areas under the receiver-operating characteristic curves (difference, 0.087, P = .049; SE, 0.044). The relative error for ultrasound-estimated fetal weight was 6.8% and by magnetic resonance-estimated fetal weight, 3.2% (P < .001). When using ultrasound-estimated fetal weight, 37.9% of fetuses (25 of 66) were estimated outside the range of ±10% of the actual birthweight, whereas this dropped to 6.1% (4 of 66) with magnetic resonance-estimated fetal weight (P < .001). The ultrasound-estimated fetal weight discordance and the birthweight discordance correlated significantly following the linear equation: ultrasound-estimated fetal weight discordance = 0.03 + 0.91 × birthweight (r = 0.75; P < .001); however, the correlation was better with magnetic resonance imaging: magnetic resonance-estimated fetal weight discordance = 0.02 + 0.81 × birthweight (r = 0.87; P < .001).

CONCLUSION

In twin pregnancies, magnetic resonance-estimated fetal weight performed immediately prior to delivery is more accurate and predicts small-for-gestational-age neonates significantly better than ultrasound-estimated fetal weight. Prediction of birthweight discordance is better with magnetic resonance imaging as compared with ultrasound.