Evaluation of sonographic and clinical measures in early versus late third trimester for birth weight prediction

IF 2.6 3区 医学 Q2 OBSTETRICS & GYNECOLOGY
Shira Regev‐Sadeh, Wisam Assaf, Adi Zehavi, Nadav Cohen, Ofer Lavie, Ariel Zilberlicht
{"title":"Evaluation of sonographic and clinical measures in early versus late third trimester for birth weight prediction","authors":"Shira Regev‐Sadeh, Wisam Assaf, Adi Zehavi, Nadav Cohen, Ofer Lavie, Ariel Zilberlicht","doi":"10.1002/ijgo.15911","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"ObjectiveTo evaluate the optimal timing for fetal weight estimation during the third trimester.MethodsThis retrospective cohort study involved fetal weight estimations from both early (28<jats:sup>+0</jats:sup>–36<jats:sup>+6</jats:sup> weeks) and late (37<jats:sup>+0</jats:sup> weeks and beyond) third trimester. These estimations were converted to predicted birth weights using the gestation‐adjusted projection formula. Birth weight predictions were compared with actual birth weights, to identify the most effective timing for weight prediction.ResultsThe study included 3549 cases, revealing mean percentage errors (MPE) of −3.69% for early sonographic assessments, −2.5% for late sonographic assessments, and −1.9% for late clinical assessments. A significant difference was found between early and late sonographic estimations (<jats:italic>P</jats:italic> &lt; 0.001), whereas late sonographic and clinical assessments did not differ significantly (<jats:italic>P</jats:italic> = 0.771). Weight predictions for fetuses below the 10th and above the 90th centiles were less accurate than for those within the 10th–90th centiles (<jats:italic>P &lt;</jats:italic> 0.001). In women with obesity, late clinical estimations were less precise (MPE of −5.85) compared with non‐obese women (MPE of −1.66, <jats:italic>P</jats:italic> &lt; 0.001). For women with diabetes, early sonographic estimations were more accurate (MPE of −1.31) compared with non‐diabetic patients (MPE of −3.94, <jats:italic>P</jats:italic> &lt; 0.001) though this difference did not persist later in pregnancy.ConclusionSonographic and clinical weight predictions in the late third trimester were more accurate than earlier third‐trimester sonographic assessments, hence continuous follow up and assessments closer to term are important. In women with diabetes, no adjustments in weight prediction methods are necessary. Accurately predicting birth weights for abnormally small or large fetuses remains challenging, indicating the need for improved screening and diagnostic strategies.","PeriodicalId":14164,"journal":{"name":"International Journal of Gynecology & Obstetrics","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":2.6000,"publicationDate":"2024-09-13","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"International Journal of Gynecology & Obstetrics","FirstCategoryId":"3","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1002/ijgo.15911","RegionNum":3,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q2","JCRName":"OBSTETRICS & GYNECOLOGY","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

ObjectiveTo evaluate the optimal timing for fetal weight estimation during the third trimester.MethodsThis retrospective cohort study involved fetal weight estimations from both early (28+0–36+6 weeks) and late (37+0 weeks and beyond) third trimester. These estimations were converted to predicted birth weights using the gestation‐adjusted projection formula. Birth weight predictions were compared with actual birth weights, to identify the most effective timing for weight prediction.ResultsThe study included 3549 cases, revealing mean percentage errors (MPE) of −3.69% for early sonographic assessments, −2.5% for late sonographic assessments, and −1.9% for late clinical assessments. A significant difference was found between early and late sonographic estimations (P < 0.001), whereas late sonographic and clinical assessments did not differ significantly (P = 0.771). Weight predictions for fetuses below the 10th and above the 90th centiles were less accurate than for those within the 10th–90th centiles (P < 0.001). In women with obesity, late clinical estimations were less precise (MPE of −5.85) compared with non‐obese women (MPE of −1.66, P < 0.001). For women with diabetes, early sonographic estimations were more accurate (MPE of −1.31) compared with non‐diabetic patients (MPE of −3.94, P < 0.001) though this difference did not persist later in pregnancy.ConclusionSonographic and clinical weight predictions in the late third trimester were more accurate than earlier third‐trimester sonographic assessments, hence continuous follow up and assessments closer to term are important. In women with diabetes, no adjustments in weight prediction methods are necessary. Accurately predicting birth weights for abnormally small or large fetuses remains challenging, indicating the need for improved screening and diagnostic strategies.
评估孕早期和孕晚期超声波和临床测量对预测出生体重的影响
方法 这项回顾性队列研究涉及孕早期(28+0-36+6 周)和孕晚期(37+0 周及以后)的胎儿体重估计。这些估计值通过妊娠调整推算公式转换为预测出生体重。出生体重预测值与实际出生体重进行了比较,以确定体重预测的最有效时间。早期和晚期声像图评估之间存在明显差异(P <0.001),而晚期声像图评估和临床评估之间没有明显差异(P = 0.771)。对低于第 10 个百分位数和高于第 90 个百分位数的胎儿体重预测的准确性低于第 10-90 个百分位数内的胎儿(P < 0.001)。与非肥胖妇女(MPE 为-1.66,P < 0.001)相比,肥胖妇女的晚期临床估计准确度较低(MPE 为-5.85)。对于糖尿病妇女,与非糖尿病患者(MPE 为-3.94,P < 0.001)相比,早期声像图估测结果更准确(MPE 为-1.31),但这种差异在妊娠后期并未持续。对于患有糖尿病的妇女,无需调整体重预测方法。准确预测异常过小或过大胎儿的出生体重仍具有挑战性,这表明需要改进筛查和诊断策略。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 求助全文
来源期刊
CiteScore
5.80
自引率
2.60%
发文量
493
审稿时长
3-6 weeks
期刊介绍: The International Journal of Gynecology & Obstetrics publishes articles on all aspects of basic and clinical research in the fields of obstetrics and gynecology and related subjects, with emphasis on matters of worldwide interest.
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术官方微信