The impact of optimal dating on the assessment of fetal growth

[A pragmatic comparison of fetal biometry curves]

INTRODUCTION

The fetal biometrics charts recommended in France for ultrasound screening include measurements of head circumference (HC), biparietal diameter (BIP), abdominal circumference (AC) and femur length (FL). New international growth standards have been recommended since 2022. The aim of this work is to quantitatively describe the differences between these biometric curves.

METHODS

The biometry curves from the French College for Fetal Ultrasound, OMS and INTERGROWTH-21 are pragmatically compared based on their original quantile regression equations (superposition and quantification of differences in millimeters and in proportion) for different percentiles of clinical interest.

RESULTS

Compared with the new charts, CFEF underestimates HC<-3DS and AC<10eP. The proportions of differences between the CFEF and INTERGROWTH-21 or WHO curves always remained <5%. The proportions of difference of the 3rd percentile of HC and FL, 10th and 90th percentile of AC were always lower than 2%, 2%, 5% and 4% respectively, between OMS and INTERGROWTH-21.

CONCLUSION

The switch to prescriptive standards suggests an improvement in the detection of fetuses with AC<10th percentile, an improvement in the detection of prenatal onset microcephaly, with no argument for a decrease in the detection rate of severe constitutional bone disease or modification of obstetrical guidelines.

[Review of the literature on intrauterine and birthweight charts]

OBJECTIVES

To describe the main intrauterine and birthweight charts and review the studies comparing their performance for the identification of infants at risk of adverse perinatal outcomes.

METHODS

We carried out a literature search using Medline and selected the charts most frequently cited in the literature, French charts and those recently published.

RESULTS

Current knowledge on the association between mortality and morbidity and growth anomalies (small and large for gestational age) mostly relies on the use of descriptive charts which describe the weight distribution in unselected populations. Prescriptive charts, which describe ideal growth in low risk populations, have been constructed more recently. Few studies have evaluated whether the thresholds used to identify infants at risk with descriptive charts (such as the 3^rd or the 10^th percentile) are applicable to prescriptive charts. There is a large variability in the percentage of fetuses or newborns identified as being at risk by each chart, with from 3 to 25% having with a weight under the 10^th percentile, regardless of whether descriptive or prescriptive charts are used. The sensitivity and specificity of antenatal screening for small or large for gestational age newborns depends on the chart used to derive estimated fetal weight percentiles.

CONCLUSION

There is marked variability between intrauterine growth charts that can influence the percentage of infants identified as having abnormal growth. These results show that before the adoption of a growth chart, it is essential to evaluate whether it adequately describes the population and its performance for identifying of infants at risk because of growth anomalies.

Conférence nationale de l’échographie obstétricale et fœtale. [The French National Committee on Obstetrical and Fetal Ultrasound guidelines 2022 (CNEOF)]

The 2022 CNEOF guidelines (Conférence nationale d'échographie obstétricale et fœtale) report has been recently issued. It presents the necessary evolutions for the years to come, in a philosophy of optimal security for patients and caregivers, through a homogenization of ultrasound screening practices. As a source of changes in practices, this new version raises concerns, and even reticence, which must be heard and addressed, by reminding that this report is not fixed and can be adapted to the realities of practice over time and their feedback. This short text presents the CNEOF, the novelties of the 2022 report and details some important parts of the report that have been a source of questioning in the month following its publication. The aim of this text is to present a summary (in addition to the full report) to reassure, through education, all the parties involved in this medical practice which is so exciting and of major importance for perinatal health. Thus, the types of ultrasound examinations (screening, diagnostic, expertise…), the conditions of their realization, dating, biometries and the items part of the ultrasound reports are presented with elements of precision useful for their implementation.

[Ante- and postnatal growth charts in France - guidelines for clinical practice from the Collège national des gynécologues et obstétriciens français (CNGOF) and from the Société française de néonatologie (SFN)]

OBJECTIVE

To recommend the most appropriate biometric charts for the detection of antenatal growth abnormalities and postnatal growth surveillance.

METHODS

Elaboration of specific questions and selection of experts by the organizing committee to answer these questions; analysis of the literature by experts and drafting conclusions by assigning a recommendation (strong or weak) and a quality of evidence (high, moderate, low, very low) and for each question; all these recommendations have been subject to multidisciplinary external review (obstetrician gynecologists, pediatricians). The objective for the reviewers was to verify the completeness of the literature review, to verify the levels of evidence established and the consistency and applicability of the resulting recommendations. The overall review of the literature, quality of evidence and recommendations were revised to take into consideration comments from external reviewers.

RESULTS

Antenatally, it is recommended to use all WHO fetal growth charts for EFW and common ultrasound biometric measurements (strong recommendation; low quality of evidence). Indeed, in comparison with other prescriptive curves and descriptive curves, the WHO prescriptive charts show better performance for the screening of SGA (Small for Gestational Age) and LGA (Large for Gestational Age) with adequate proportions of fetuses screened at extreme percentiles in the French population. It also has the advantages of having EFW charts by sex and biometric parameters obtained from the same perspective cohort of women screened by qualified sonographers who measured the biometric parameters according to international standards. Postnatally, it is recommended to use the updated Fenton charts for the assessment of birth measurements and for growth monitoring in preterm infants (strong recommendation; moderate quality of evidence) and for the assessment of birth measurements in term newborn (expert opinion).

CONCLUSION

It is recommended to use WHO fetal growth charts for antenatal growth monitoring and Fenton charts for the newborn.

Targeted newborn metabolomics: prediction of gestational age from cord blood

OBJECTIVE

Our study sought to determine whether metabolites from a retrospective collection of banked cord blood specimens could accurately estimate gestational age and to validate these findings in cord blood samples from Busia, Uganda.

STUDY DESIGN

Forty-seven metabolites were measured by tandem mass spectrometry or enzymatic assays from 942 banked cord blood samples. Multiple linear regression was performed, and the best model was used to predict gestational age, in weeks, for 150 newborns from Busia, Uganda.

RESULTS

The model including metabolites and birthweight, predicted the gestational ages within 2 weeks for 76.7% of the Ugandan cohort. Importantly, this model estimated the prevalence of preterm birth <34 weeks closer to the actual prevalence (4.67% and 4.00%, respectively) than a model with only birthweight which overestimates the prevalence by 283%.

CONCLUSION

Models that include cord blood metabolites and birth weight appear to offer improvement in gestational age estimation over birth weight alone.

Crown-rump length measurement error: impact on assessment of growth

OBJECTIVE

To examine the impact of first-trimester crown-rump length (CRL) measurement error on the interpretation of estimated fetal weight (EFW) and classification of fetuses as small-, large- or appropriate-for-gestational age on subsequent growth scans.

METHODS

We examined the effects of errors of ± 2, ± 3 and ± 4 mm in the measurement of fetal CRL on percentiles of EFW at 20, 32 and 36 weeks' gestation and classification as small-, large- or appropriate-for-gestational age. Published data on CRL measurement error were used to determine variation present in practice.

RESULTS

A measurement error of -2 mm in first-trimester CRL shifts an EFW on the 10^th percentile at the 20-week scan to around the 20^th percentile, and the effect of a CRL measurement error of + 2 mm would shift an EFW on the 10^th percentile to around the 5^th percentile. At 32 weeks, a first-trimester CRL measurement error would shift an EFW on the 10^th percentile to the 7^th (+ 2 mm) or 14^th (-2 mm) percentile; at 36 weeks, the EFW would shift from the 10^th percentile to the 8^th (+ 2 mm) or 12^th (-2 mm) percentile. Published data suggest that measurement errors of 2 mm or more are common in practice.

CONCLUSION

Because of the widespread and potentially severe consequences of CRL measurement errors as small as 2 mm on clinical assessment, patient management and research results, there is a need to increase awareness of the impact of CRL measurement error and to reduce measurement error variation through standardization and quality control. © 2021 International Society of Ultrasound in Obstetrics and Gynecology.