Predicting large fetuses at birth: do multiple ultrasound examinations and longitudinal statistical modelling improve prediction?

Jun Zhang, Sungduk Kim, Jagteshwar Grewal, Paul S Albert, Jun Zhang, Sungduk Kim, Jagteshwar Grewal, Paul S Albert

Abstract

Predicting large fetuses at birth has long been a challenge in obstetric practice. We examined whether ultrasound examinations at multiple times during pregnancy improve the accuracy of prediction using repeated, longitudinal statistical modelling, and whether adding maternal characteristics improves the accuracy of prediction. We used data from a previous study conducted in Norway and Sweden from 1986 to 1989 in which each pregnant woman had four ultrasound examinations at around 17, 25, 33 and 37 weeks of gestation. At birth, infant size was classified as large-for-gestational age (LGA, >90th centile) and macrosomia (>4000 g) or not. We used a longitudinal random effects model with quadratic fixed and random effects to predict term LGA and macrosomia at birth. Receiver-operator curves and mean-squared error were used to measure accuracy of the prediction. Ultrasound examination around 37 weeks had the best accuracy in predicting LGA and macrosomia at birth. Adding multiple ultrasound examinations at earlier gestations did not improve the accuracy. Adjusting for maternal characteristics had limited impact on the accuracy of prediction. Thus, a single ultrasound examination at late gestation close to birth is the simplest method currently available to predict LGA and macrosomia.

© 2012 Blackwell Publishing Ltd.

Figures

Figure 1
Figure 1
Estimated fetal weight dotand birthweight circleby gestational age in the study population. The fetal growth curves (representing the 10th, 50th and 90th percentiles) are based on the normal reference by Hadlock et al.

References

    1. Esakoff TF, Cheng YW, Sparks TN, Caughey AB. The association between birthweight 4000 g or greater and perinatal outcomes in patients with and without gestational diabetes mellitus. American Journal of Obstetrics and Gynecology. 2009;200:672.e1–4.
    1. Scioscia M, Vimercati A, Ceci O, Vicino M, Selvaggi LE. Estimation of birth weight by two dimensional ultrasonography. Obstetrics and Gynecology. 2008;111:57–65.
    1. Peregrine E, O’Brien P, Jauniaux E. Clinical and ultrasound estimation of birth weight prior to induction of labor at term. Ultrasound in Obstetrics and Gynecology. 2007;29:304–9.
    1. Hadlock FP, Harrist RB, Sharman RS, Deter RL, Park SK. Estimation of fetal weight with the use of head, body, and femur measurements – a prospective study. American Journal of Obstetrics and Gynecology. 1985;151:333–7.
    1. Hedrianna HL, Moore TR. A comparison of single versus multiple growth ultrasonographic examinations in predicting birth weight. American Journal of Obstetrics and Gynecology. 1994;170:1600–6.
    1. Ben-Haroush A, Chen R, Hadar E, Hod M, Yogev Y. Accuracy of a single fetal weight estimation at 29 – 34 weeks in diabetic pregnancies: can it predict large-for-gestational-age infants at term? American Journal of Obstetrics and Gynecology. 2007;197:497.e1–6.
    1. Ben-Haroush A, Yogev Y, Hod M, Bar J. Predictive value of a single early fetal weight estimate in normal pregnancies. European Journal of Obstetrics Gynecology and Reproductive Biology. 2007;130:187–92.
    1. Bryant DR, Zador I, Landwehr JB, Wolfe HM. Limited clinical utility of midtrimester fetal morphometric percentile rankings in screening for birth weight abnormalities. American Journal of Obstetrics and Gynecology. 1997;177:859–63.
    1. Pressman EK, Bienstock JL, Blakemore KJ, Martin SA, Callan NA. Prediction of birth weight by ultrasound in the third trimester. Obstetrics and Gynecology. 2000;95:502–6.
    1. Larsen T, Greisen G, Petersen S. Prediction of birth weight by ultrasound-estimated fetal weight: a comparison between single and repeated estimates. European Journal of Obstetrics Gynecology and Reproductive Biology. 1995;60:37–40.
    1. Bergsjø P, Hoffman HJ, Davis RO, Goldenberg RL, Lindmark G, Jacobsen G, Cutter G, Markestad T, Nelson KG, Bakkteteig LS. Preliminary Results from the Collaborative Alabama and Scandinavian Study of Successive Small-for-Gestational Age Births. Acta et Obstetrics Gynecology Scand. 1989;68:19–25.
    1. Bjerkedal T, Skjaerven R. Percentiles of birth weight and crown-heel length for single live births. Tidsskr Nor Laegeforen. 1980;100:1088–91.
    1. Laird NM, Ware JH. Random-effects models for longitudinal data. Biometrics. 1982;38:963–974.
    1. Carroll RJ, Spiegelman CH, Lan KKG, Abbott RD. On errors-in-variables for binary regression models. Biometrika. 1984;71:19–25.
    1. Albert PS. A linear mixed model for predicting a binary event under random effects misspecification. Press at Statistics in Medicine; 2011.
    1. Hadlock FP, Harrist RB, Martinez-Poyer J. In utero analysis of fetal growth: a sonographic weight standard. Radiology. 1991;181:129–33.
    1. Nahum GG, Stanislaw H, Huffaker J. Accurate prediction of term birth weight from prospectively measurable maternal characteristics. Journal of Reproductive Medicine. 1999;44:705–12.
    1. Janes H, Pepe MS, Gu W. Assessing the value of risk predictions by using risk stratification tables. Annals of internal medicine. 2008;149:751–760.
    1. Melamed N, Yogev Y, Meizner I, Mashiach R, Ben-Haroush A. Sonographic prediction of fetal macrosomia: the consequences of false diagnosis. Journal of Ultrasound in Medicine. 2010;29:225–30.
    1. Villandre L, Hutcheon JA, Perez ME, Abehnaim H, Jacobsen G, Platt RW. Modeling fetal weight for gestational age: a comparison of a flexible multi-level spline-based model with other approaches. International Journal of Biostatistics. 2011;7:Article 32.

Source: PubMed

Szponzorok és közreműködők

Egészségi állapot

Kábítószer-beavatkozások

3
Iratkozz fel