Prenatal identification of small-for-gestational age and risk of neonatal morbidity and stillbirth

E Nohuz, O Rivière, K Coste, F Vendittelli, E Nohuz, O Rivière, K Coste, F Vendittelli

Abstract

Objective: To assess whether prenatal identification of small-for-gestational age (SGA) was associated with lower rates of the primary composite outcome of stillbirth, death in the delivery room or neonatal complications, and secondary outcomes of the composite outcome according to gestational age at delivery, stillbirth and low 5-min Apgar score.

Methods: This historical cohort study included women who had a singleton delivery (≥ 32 weeks) between 1994 and 2011 at one of 247 French maternity units. We excluded pregnancies terminated medically, infants with malformations or with missing data on estimated fetal weight or birth weight, and women with missing delivery data. Among the 24 946 infants born SGA (< 5th percentile), we compared those who had been identified as such prenatally (n = 5093; 20%), with those who had not (n = 19 853; 80%). The main outcome was a composite variable defined as stillbirth or death in the delivery room, or transfer to a neonatal department either immediately or during the neonatal stay in the obstetrics ward. Secondary outcomes were the composite outcome according to gestational age at delivery (32 to < 35 weeks; 35 to < 37 weeks, 37 to < 40 weeks, or ≥ 40 weeks), stillbirth and low 5-min Apgar score (≤ 4 and < 7).

Results: The mean ± SD birth weight was 2449.1 ± 368.3 g. The rate of the main composite outcome was higher in the group identified prenatally as SGA compared with non-identified SGA fetuses (39.5% vs 13.5%; adjusted relative risk (aRR), 1.29; 95% CI, 1.21-1.38). This association was not observed in the subgroups delivered before 37 weeks. The stillbirth rate was lower in fetuses with prenatal suspicion of SGA (aRR, 0.47; 95% CI, 0.27-0.79), while the 5-min Apgar score did not differ between the two groups. The a-posteriori study power with α = 0.05 was 99%.

Conclusion: Prenatal identification of SGA was not associated with lower fetal or neonatal morbidity overall, although it was associated with a lower rate of stillbirth. Copyright © 2019 ISUOG. Published by John Wiley & Sons Ltd.

Keywords: estimated fetal weight; fetal growth restriction; intrauterine growth restriction; neonatal morbidity, small-for-gestational-age fetus, stillbirth.

Copyright © 2019 ISUOG. Published by John Wiley & Sons Ltd.

References

REFERENCES

    1. Association des Utilisateurs de Dossiers Informatisés en Pédiatrie, Obstétrique et Gynécologie. [Accessed 15 January 2018].
    1. Fratelli N, Valcamonico A, Prefumo F, Pagani G, Guarneri T, Frusca T. Effects of antenatal recognition and follow-up on perinatal outcomes in small-for-gestational age infants delivered after 36 weeks. Acta Obstet Gynecol Scand 2013; 92: 223-229.
    1. Driul L, Londero AP, Della Martina M, Papadakis C, Campana C, Pontello D, Citossi A, Marchesoni D. Intrauterine growth restriction and pregnancy outcome. Minerva Ginecol 2008; 60: 231-238.
    1. Verlijsdonk JW, Winkens B, Boers K, Scherjon S, Roumen F. Suspected versus non-suspected small-for-gestational age fetuses at term: perinatal outcomes. J Matern Fetal Neonatal Med 2012; 25: 938-943.
    1. Monier I, Blondel B, Ego A, Kaminiski M, Goffinet F, Zeitlin J. Poor effectiveness of antenatal detection of fetal growth restriction and consequences for obstetric management and neonatal outcomes: a French national study. BJOG 2015; 122: 518-527.
    1. Lindqvist PG, Molin J. Does antenatal identification of small-for-gestational age fetuses significantly improve their outcomes? Ultrasound Obstetrics Gynecol 2005; 25: 258-264.
    1. Pilliod RA, Cheng YW, Snowden JM, Doss AE, Caughey AB. The risk of intra uterine fetal death in the small-for-gestational-age fetus. Am J Obstet Gynecol 2012; 207: 318.e1-6.
    1. Flenady V, Koopmans L, Middleton P, Frøen JF, Smith GC, Gibbons K, Coory M, Gordon A, Ellwood D, McIntyre HD, Fretts R, Ezzati M. Major risk factors for stillbirth in high-income countries: a systematic review and meta-analysis. Lancet 2011; 377: 1331-1340.
    1. Bricker L, Medley N, Pratt JJ. Routine ultrasound in late pregnancy (after 24 weeks' gestation). Cochrane Database Syst Rev 2015; 29: CD001451.
    1. Peyronnet V, Sibiude J, Mandelbrot L, Kayem G. Impact of the detection of small for gestational age fetuses on the neonatal prognosis. Gynecol Obstet Fertil Senol 2018; 46: 71-77.
    1. Aviram A, Yogev Y, Bardin R, Meizner I, Wiznitzer A, Hadar E. Small for gestational age newborns - does pre-recognition make a difference in pregnancy outcome? J Matern Fetal Neonatal Med 2015; 28: 1520-1524.
    1. Jahn A, Razum O, Berle P. Routine screening for intrauterine growth retardation in Germany: low sensitivity and questionable benefit for diagnosed cases. Acta Obstet Gynecol Scand 1998; 77: 643-648.
    1. Ohel G, Ruach M. Perinatal outcome of idiopathic small for gestational age pregnancies at term: the effect of antenatal diagnosis. Int J Gynecol Obstet 1996; 55: 29-32.
    1. Chauhan SP, Beydoun H, Chang E, Sandlin AT, Dahlke JD, Igwe E, Magann EF, Anderson KR, Abuhamad AZ, Ananth CV. Prenatal detection of fetal growth restriction in newborns classified as small for gestational age: correlates and risk of neonatal morbidity. Am J Perinatal 2014; 31: 187-194.
    1. Vendittelli F, Pons JC, Lemery D, Mamelle N. The term breech presentation: neonatal results and obstetrics practices in France. Eur J Obstet Gynecol Reprod Biol 2006; 125: 176-184.
    1. Vendittelli F, Rivière O, Crenn-Hébert C, Rozan MA, Maria B, Jacquetin B. AUDIPOG Sentinel Network. Is a breech presentation at term more frequent in women with a history of caesarean delivery? Am J Obstet Gynecol 2008; 198: 521-526.
    1. Rapport du comité national technique de l'échographie de dépistage prénatal. 2005. [Accessed 17 January 2018].
    1. Collège Français d'Echographie Fœtale (CFEF). Les courbes de référence. [Accessed 17 January 2018].
    1. L'échographie de diagnostic. Rapport du comité́ national technique de l'échographie de dépistage prénatal. 2010. [Accessed 17 January 2018].
    1. Massoud M, Duyme M, Fontanges M; French College of Fetal Sonography (CFEF), Combourieu D. Chart for estimation of fetal weight 2014 by the French College of Fetal Sonography (CFEF). J Gynecol Obstet Biol Reprod 2016; 45: 80-85.
    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. Am J Obstet Gynecol 1985; 151: 333-337.
    1. Esinler D, Bircan O, Esin S, Sahin EG, Kandemir O, Yalvac S. Finding the best formula to predict the fetal weight: comparison of 18 formulas. Gynecol Obstet Invest 2015; 80: 78-84.
    1. Vayssière C, Sentilhes L, Ego A, Bernard C, Cambourieu D, Flamant C, Gascoin G, Gaudineau A, Grangé G, Houfflin-Debarge V, Langer B, Malan V, Marcorelles P, Nizard J, Perrotin F, Salomon L, Senat MV, Serry A, Tessier V, Truffert P, Tsatsaris V, Arnaud C, Carbonne B. Fetal growth restriction and intra-uterine growth restriction: guidelines for clinical practice from the French College of Gynecologists and Obstetricians. Eur J Obstet Gynecol Reprod Biol 2015; 193: 10-18.
    1. Deruelle P, Servan-Schreiber E, Riviere O, Garabedian C, Vendittelli F. Does a body mass index greater than 25kg/m2 increase maternal and neonatal morbidity? A French historical cohort study. J Gynecol Obstet Hum Reprod 2017; 46: 601-608.
    1. Chamberlain C, O'Mara-Eves A, Porter J, Coleman T, Perlen SM, Thomas J, McKenzie JE. Psychosocial interventions for supporting women to stop smoking in pregnancy. Cochrane Database Syst Rev 2017; 14: CD001055.
    1. Panaitescu AM, Syngelaki A, Prodan N, Akolekar R, Nicolaides KH. Chronic hypertension and adverse pregnancy outcome: a cohort sudy. Ultrasound Obstet Gynecol 2017; 50: 228-235.
    1. Zou G. A modified Poisson regression approach to prospective studies with binary data. Am J Epidemiol 2004; 159: 702-706.
    1. Direction Générale de la Santé. Enquête nationale périnatale 2010. Les naissances en 2010 et leur évolution depuis 2003. [Accessed 19 January 2018].
    1. Monier I, Blondel B, Ego A, Kaminski M, Goffinet F, Zeitlin J. Does the presence of risk factors for fetal growth restriction increase the probability of antenatal detection? A French national study. Paediatr Perinat Epidemiol 2016; 30: 46-55.
    1. Mamelle N, Cochet V, Claris O. Definition of fetal growth restriction according to constitutional growth potential. Biol Neonate 2001; 80: 277-285.
    1. Landres IV, Clark A, Chasen ST. Improving antenatal prediction of small-for-gestational-age neonates by using customized versus population-based reference standards. J Ultrasound Med 2013; 32: 1581-1586.
    1. McCowan LM, Thompson JM, Taylor RS, North RA, Poston L, Baker PN, Myers J, Roberts CT, Dekker GA, Simpson NA, Walker JJ, Kenny LC, SCOPE Consortium. Clinical prediction in early pregnancy of infants small for gestational age by customized birthweight centiles: findings from a healthy nulliparous cohort. PLoS One 2013; 8: e70917.
    1. Mamelle N, Boniol M, Rivière O, Joly MO, Mellier G, Maria B, Rousset B, Claris O. Identification of newborns with Fetal Growth Restriction (FGR) in weight and/or length based on constitutional growth potential. Eur J Pediatr 2006; 165: 717-725.
    1. Kaaji MW, Struijk PC, Lotgering FK. Accuracy of sonographic estimates of fetal weight in very small infants. Ultrasound Obstet Gynecol 1999; 13: 99-102.
    1. Mattioli KP, Sanderson M, Chauhan SP. Inadequate identification of small-for-gestational-age fetuses at urban teaching hospital. Int J Gynaecol Obstet 2010; 109: 140-143.
    1. Fadigas C, Saiid Y, Gonzalez R, Poon LC, Nicolaides KH. Prediction of small-for-gestational-age neonates: screening by fetal biometry at 35-37 weeks. Ultrasound Obstet Gynecol 2015; 45: 559-565.
    1. Sovio U, White IR, Dacey A, Pasupathy D, Smith GCS. Screening for fetal growth restriction with universal third trimester ultrasonography in nulliparous women in the pregnancy outcome prediction (POP) study: a prospective cohort study. Lancet 2015; 386: 2089-2097.
    1. Stacey T, Thompson JM, Mitchell EA, Zuccollo JM, Ekeroma AJ, McCowan LM. Antenatal care, identification of suboptimal fetal growth and risk of late stillbirth; findings from the Auckland Stillbirth Study. Aust N Z J Obstet Gynaecol 2012; 52: 242-247.
    1. Gardosi J, Madurasinghe V, Williams M, Malik A, Francis A. Maternal and fetal risk factors for stillbirth: population based study. BMJ 2013; 346: f108.
    1. Bond DM, Gordon A, Hyett J, de Vries B, Carberry AE, Morris J. Planned early delivery versus expectant management of the term suspected compromised baby for improving outcomes. Cochrane Database Syst Rev 2015; 24: CD009433.
    1. Boers KE, Vijgen SMC, Bijlenga D, van der Post JAM, Bekedam J, Kwee A, van der Salm PC, van Pampus MG, Spaanderman ME, de Boer K, Duvekot JJ, Bremer HA, Hasaart TH, Delemarre FM, Bloemenkamp KW, van Meir CA, Willekes C, Wijnen EJ, Rijken M, le Cessie S, Roumen FJ, Thornton JG, van Lith JM, Mol BW, Scherjon SA; DIGITAT study group. Induction versus expectant monitoring for intra uterine growth restriction at term: randomised equivalence trial (DIGITAT). BMJ 2010; 341: c7087.
    1. Mendez-Figueroa H, Truong VT, Pedorza C, Khan AM, Chauhan SP. Small-for-gestational-age infants among uncomplicated pregnancies at term: a secondary analysis of 9 maternal-fetal medicine units network studies. Am J Obstet Gynecol 2016; 215: 628.e1-7.

Source: PubMed

Sponsor e collaboratori

Condizioni mediche

Interventi farmacologici

3
Sottoscrivi