Defining fetal growth restriction: abdominal circumference as an alternative criterion

Diagnostic performance of 32 vs 36 weeks ultrasound in predicting late-onset fetal growth restriction and small-for-gestational-age neonates: a systematic review and meta-analysis

OBJECTIVE

Fetal growth restriction is an independent risk factor for fetal death and adverse neonatal outcomes. The main aim of this study was to investigate the diagnostic performance of 32 vs 36 weeks ultrasound of fetal biometry in detecting late-onset fetal growth restriction and predicting small-for-gestational-age neonates.

DATA SOURCES

A systematic search was performed to identify relevant studies published until June 2022, using the databases PubMed, Web of Science, and Scopus.

STUDY ELIGIBILITY CRITERIA

Cohort studies in low-risk or unselected singleton pregnancies with screening ultrasound performed at ≥32 weeks of gestation were used.

METHODS

The estimated fetal weight and abdominal circumference were assessed as index tests for the prediction of small for gestational age (birthweight of <10th percentile) and detecting fetal growth restriction (estimated fetal weight of <10th percentile and/or abdominal circumference of <10th percentile). The quality of the included studies was independently assessed by 2 reviewers using the Quality Assessment of Diagnostic Accuracy Studies 2 tool. For the meta-analysis, hierarchical summary area under the receiver operating characteristic curves were constructed, and quantitative data synthesis was performed using random-effects models.

RESULTS

The analysis included 25 studies encompassing 73,981 low-risk pregnancies undergoing third-trimester ultrasound assessment for growth, of which 5380 neonates (7.3%) were small for gestational age at birth. The pooled sensitivities for estimated fetal weight of <10th percentile and abdominal circumference of <10th percentile in predicting small for gestational age were 36% (95% confidence interval, 27%-46%) and 37% (95% confidence interval, 19%-60%), respectively, at 32 weeks ultrasound and 48% (95% confidence interval, 41%-56%) and 50% (95% confidence interval, 25%-74%), respectively, at 36 weeks ultrasound. The pooled specificities for estimated fetal weight of <10th percentile and abdominal circumference of <10th percentile in detecting small for gestational age were 93% (95% confidence interval, 91%-95%) and 95% (95% confidence interval, 85%-98%), respectively, at 32 weeks ultrasound and 93% (95% confidence interval, 91%-95%) and 97% (95% confidence interval, 85%-98%), respectively, at 36 weeks ultrasound. The observed diagnostic odds ratios for an estimated fetal weight of <10th percentile and an abdominal circumference of <10th percentile in detecting small for gestational age were 8.8 (95% confidence interval, 5.4-14.4) and 11.6 (95% confidence interval, 6.2-21.6), respectively, at 32 weeks ultrasound and 13.3 (95% confidence interval, 10.4-16.9) and 36.0 (95% confidence interval, 4.9-260.0), respectively, at 36 weeks ultrasound. The pooled sensitivity, specificity, and diagnostic odds ratio in predicting fetal growth restriction were 71% (95% confidence interval, 52%-85%), 90% (95% confidence interval, 79%-95%), and 25.8 (95% confidence interval, 14.5-45.8), respectively, at 32 weeks ultrasound and 48% (95% confidence interval, 41%-55%), 94% (95% confidence interval, 93%-96%), and 16.9 (95% confidence interval, 10.8-26.6), respectively, at 36 weeks ultrasound. Abdominal circumference of <10th percentile seemed to have comparable sensitivity to estimated fetal weight of <10th percentile in predicting small-for-gestational-age neonates.

CONCLUSION

An ultrasound assessment of the fetal biometry at 36 weeks of gestation seemed to have better predictive accuracy for small-for-gestational-age neonates than an ultrasound assessment at 32 weeks of gestation. However, an opposite trend was noted when the outcome was fetal growth restriction. Fetal abdominal circumference had a similar predictive accuracy to that of estimated fetal weight in detecting small-for-gestational-age neonates.

Comparing outcomes of fetal growth restriction defined by estimated fetal weight versus isolated abdominal circumference

PURPOSE

The objective of this study was to compare maternal and neonatal outcomes when the diagnosis of FGR was based on isolated abdominal circumference < 10th percentile for gestational age (GA) (iAC group) versus overall estimated fetal weight < 10th percentile (EFW group).

METHODS

This was a retrospective cohort study of singleton gestations who underwent growth ultrasounds and delivered at a single health system from 1/1/19-9/4/20. The study group was comprised of patients with AC < 10th percentile and EFW ≥ than the 10th percentile (iAC group). The control group included patients with overall EFW < 10th percentile (EFW group). Outcomes evaluated included GA at delivery, mode of delivery, fetal and neonatal outcomes. Data was analyzed using Mann Whitney U, X2, and Fisher exact tests with significance defined as p < 0.05.

RESULTS

635 women met the inclusion criteria, 259 women in the iAC group and 376 women in the EFW group. The iAC group was noted to have a later GA at diagnosis and delivery. iAC was associated with lower rates of preterm birth (PTB), NICU admission, SGA at delivery and umbilical artery cord gas < 7.0.

CONCLUSION

Using iAC as a definition of FGR increased the number of FGR cases by 1.69-fold over EFW criteria alone. However, obstetrical and neonatal outcomes for the iAC group appear to be significantly better than those in the EFW group, with low rates of PTB, NICU admission, and umbilical artery cord gas < 7.0.

Comparative Diagnostic Performance of Estimated Fetal Weight and Isolated Abdominal Circumference for the Detection of Fetal Growth Restriction

OBJECTIVES

To describe the comparative incidence, detection of small-for-gestational age (SGA), and composite perinatal morbidity (CPM) associated with diagnostic criteria of fetal growth restriction (FGR) by estimated fetal weight (EFW) <10% with those with isolated abdominal circumference (AC) measurements <10%.

METHODS

We performed a retrospective cohort study of 1587 patients receiving prenatal care and delivery at our institution. We included all patients with ultrasounds and delivery outcomes available, and excluded terminations, second trimester losses, and pregnancies without ultrasounds. EFW was calculated from Hadlock and use of the Duryea centiles, and AC from Hadlock's reference curves. We determined SGA at birth and defined CPM as birthweight less than 3% or birthweight less than 10% with neonatal morbidity.

RESULTS

Of 1587 patients, 28 (1.8%) were classified as FGR by EFW <10%. Three of 12 patients with isolated AC <10% developed EFW <10% later in pregnancy (25%). The performance of each diagnostic criteria were comparable for the outcomes of SGA and CPM, with similar sensitivities, but with decreased specificity for SGA outcome, and an increased false positive rate for patients classified as FGR by isolated AC <10, with a tradeoff of decreased false negatives.

CONCLUSIONS

Broadening the diagnosis of FGR to include patients with isolated AC <10 did not significantly increase the detection of pregnancies at risk for SGA or CPM. Our conclusions may be limited by a lack of statistical power given a low frequency of SGA and CPM.

Association Between Fetal Thymus Size and Intrauterine Growth Restriction

Objective:

The objective of this study was to evaluate the association between reduced fetal thymus size and intrauterine growth restriction (IUGR). This study was devised to determine the association between thymus size and any abnormal Doppler indices within the fetal umbilical artery (UA), as well as the middle cerebral artery (MCA).

Materials and Methods:

Forty-six pregnancies between 20 and 38 weeks of gestation with IUGR and 46 normal pregnancies within similar gestational age (GA) range were included. The transverse diameter of fetal thymus was measured. In the IUGR group, the fetal umbilical artery (UA) and middle cerebral artery (MCA) Doppler flow velocities were recorded.

Results:

The mean GA of fetuses with IUGR (33.5 weeks) was higher than control group (30.3 weeks). To adjust for the effect of GA, analysis of covariance (ANCOVA) was performed. The adjusted mean thymus diameters were 19.02 mm in IUGR and 21.25 within the control group (mean difference = 2.23 mm; P = .02). The mean (±SD) thymus size in 16 fetuses, with abnormal Doppler findings, was significantly lower than in the group with normal Doppler findings, 17.45 (±2.50) vs 22.02 (±5.39) mm; P < .001.

Conclusion:

IUGR may be associated with reduced fetal thymus size, especially when coupled with abnormal Doppler findings. The thymus size in a group of IUGR fetuses, with abnormal Doppler findings, was smaller than IUGR fetuses, with normal Doppler findings.

Can a Difference in Gestational Age According to Biparietal Diameter and Abdominal Circumference Predict Intrapartum Placental Abruption?

This study aimed to investigate whether a difference in gestational age according to biparietal diameter (BPD) and abdominal circumference (AC) could be a clinically useful predictor of placental abruption during the intrapartum period. This retrospective cohort study was based on singletons who were delivered after 32 + 0 weeks between July 2015 and July 2020. We only included cases with at least two antepartum sonographies available within 4 weeks of delivery (n = 2790). We divided the study population into two groups according to the presence or absence of placental abruption and compared the clinical variables. The incidence of placental abruption was 2.0% (56/2790) and was associated with an older maternal age, a higher rate of preeclampsia, and being small for the gestational age. A difference of >2 weeks in gestational age according to BPD and AC occurred at a higher rate in the placental abruption group compared to the no abruption group (>2 weeks, 21.4% (12/56) vs. 7.5% (205/2734), p < 0.001; >3 weeks, 12.5% (7/56) vs. 2.0% (56/2734), p < 0.001). Logistic regression analysis revealed that the differences of >2 weeks and >3 weeks were both independent risk factors for placental abruption (odds ratio (OR) (95% confidence interval), 2.289 (1.140-4.600) and 3.918 (1.517-9.771), respectively) after adjusting for maternal age, preeclampsia, and small for gestational age births. We identified that a difference in gestational age of >2 weeks between BPD and AC could be an independent predictor of placental abruption.