Clinical and Sonographic Estimates of Birth Weight Among Diabetic Parturients

Hendrix, Morrison, McLaren, Magann, Chauhan
{"title":"Clinical and Sonographic Estimates of Birth Weight Among Diabetic Parturients","authors":"Hendrix,&nbsp;Morrison,&nbsp;McLaren,&nbsp;Magann,&nbsp;Chauhan","doi":"","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><p>>Objective: To determine the relative accuracy of clinical and sonographic estimates of fetal weight (EFW) among parturients with diabetes requiring insulin (White's classifications A2 and higher).Methods: In early labor, clinical EFW was followed by sonographic mensuration of fetal parts. At the completion of the study, sonographic EFW was calculated using abdominal circumference and femur length. Student's t test, Wilcoxan test, and chi square test were used to assess the relative accuracy of the two methods of assessing birth weight.Results: Among 94 parturients with various classifications of diabetes, the clinical estimate of birth weight has a significantly higher simple error (-180.3 + 419.5 g) but not a significantly higher mean standardized absolute error (130.7 +/- 130.1 g/kg) than sonographic prediction (-139.3 +/- 447.1 g, 115.6 +/- 90.8 g/kg, respectively). Analysis of the data, according to gestational age, indicates that clinical EFW is more accurate than sonographic EFW among term (n = 67) parturients with diabetes, but both methods are comparable in preterm (n = 27) parturients. However, when the data are analyzed according to birth weight, EFW by Leopold maneuvers is significantly more accurate than those obtained sonographically in infants weighing 2500-3999 g (n = 66) and >4000 g (n = 12).Conclusion: In term gestations of diabetic mothers and those infants with a birth weight of 2500 g or more, the clinical estimate of birth weight is more accurate; however, in preterm diabetic pregnancies, clinical and sonographic estimates are equal.</p>","PeriodicalId":79506,"journal":{"name":"Journal of maternal-fetal investigation : the official journal of French Society of Ultrasound in Medicine and Biology ... [et al.]","volume":"8 1","pages":"17-20"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"1998-03-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Journal of maternal-fetal investigation : the official journal of French Society of Ultrasound in Medicine and Biology ... [et al.]","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

>Objective: To determine the relative accuracy of clinical and sonographic estimates of fetal weight (EFW) among parturients with diabetes requiring insulin (White's classifications A2 and higher).Methods: In early labor, clinical EFW was followed by sonographic mensuration of fetal parts. At the completion of the study, sonographic EFW was calculated using abdominal circumference and femur length. Student's t test, Wilcoxan test, and chi square test were used to assess the relative accuracy of the two methods of assessing birth weight.Results: Among 94 parturients with various classifications of diabetes, the clinical estimate of birth weight has a significantly higher simple error (-180.3 + 419.5 g) but not a significantly higher mean standardized absolute error (130.7 +/- 130.1 g/kg) than sonographic prediction (-139.3 +/- 447.1 g, 115.6 +/- 90.8 g/kg, respectively). Analysis of the data, according to gestational age, indicates that clinical EFW is more accurate than sonographic EFW among term (n = 67) parturients with diabetes, but both methods are comparable in preterm (n = 27) parturients. However, when the data are analyzed according to birth weight, EFW by Leopold maneuvers is significantly more accurate than those obtained sonographically in infants weighing 2500-3999 g (n = 66) and >4000 g (n = 12).Conclusion: In term gestations of diabetic mothers and those infants with a birth weight of 2500 g or more, the clinical estimate of birth weight is more accurate; however, in preterm diabetic pregnancies, clinical and sonographic estimates are equal.

糖尿病产妇出生体重的临床和超声评估
目的:确定需要胰岛素治疗的糖尿病孕妇(White's分类A2及以上)的临床和超声估计胎儿体重(EFW)的相对准确性。方法:在分娩早期,采用临床EFW,超声测量胎儿各部位。在研究结束时,超声EFW使用腹围和股骨长度计算。采用学生t检验、Wilcoxan检验和卡方检验评价两种出生体重评估方法的相对准确性。结果:94例不同类型糖尿病患儿中,临床估计出生体重的简单误差(-180.3 + 419.5 g)明显高于超声预测(-139.3 +/- 447.1 g、115.6 +/- 90.8 g/kg),但平均标准化绝对误差(130.7 +/- 130.1 g/kg)无显著性差异。对数据进行分析,根据胎龄,临床EFW对足月(n = 67)糖尿病孕妇比超声EFW更准确,但两种方法对早产(n = 27)糖尿病孕妇具有可比性。然而,当根据出生体重分析数据时,在体重2500-3999 g (n = 66)和>4000 g (n = 12)的婴儿中,利奥波德机动法获得的EFW明显比超声获得的更准确。结论:糖尿病母亲足月妊娠及新生儿出生体重大于等于2500g时,临床对新生儿出生体重的估计更为准确;然而,在早产糖尿病妊娠,临床和超声估计是相等的。
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
自引率
0.00%
发文量
0
×
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:604180095
Book学术官方微信