胎儿生长边缘与胎儿生长受限的关系。

IF 1.5 4区 医学 Q3 OBSTETRICS & GYNECOLOGY
Baillie Bronner, Monique Holod, Margaret Schermerhorn, Juliana Sung, Anna McCormick, Samantha de Los Reyes
{"title":"胎儿生长边缘与胎儿生长受限的关系。","authors":"Baillie Bronner, Monique Holod, Margaret Schermerhorn, Juliana Sung, Anna McCormick, Samantha de Los Reyes","doi":"10.1055/a-2451-9118","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Objective: </strong>To evaluate if an estimated fetal weight (EFW) between the 10-15th percentiles at time of anatomy ultrasound, referred to as borderline fetal growth, is associated with progression to fetal growth restriction (FGR) on subsequent ultrasound, delivery of a SGA neonate or neonatal intensive care (NICU) admission.</p><p><strong>Study design: </strong>We performed a secondary analysis using the Nulliparous Pregnancy Outcomes Study: Monitoring Mothers-to-Be data (NuMom2b). The exposures were normotensive pregnancies with non-anomalous singleton gestations with normal growth, defined as EFW >15th percentile at the anatomy scan compared to borderline fetal growth fetuses defined as those with an EFW in the 10-15th percentile. The primary outcome was FGR at subsequent ultrasound, defined as EFW or AC <10%. The secondary outcomes were NICU admission and small for gestational age (SGA) neonate. Univariable analyses were performed comparing maternal baseline demographic and clinical characteristics. Multivariable analysis was performed for the primary outcome with variables adjusted a priori for body mass index, smoking status, race/ethnicity, insurance status, and drug use.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>4883 patients met inclusion criteria with 114 in the borderline fetal growth group and 4769 in the normal growth group. There were no significant differences in maternal demographic or medical characteristics (Table 1). In adjusted multivariable analysis, patients with borderline growth had significantly higher odds of being diagnosed with FGR at their subsequent scan (aOR 6.68, CI 3.98-11.20) compared to those with normal growth. For secondary outcomes, patients with borderline fetal growth were significantly more likely to have SGA neonates (6.14% vs. 2.67%, p= 0.025). There was no difference in admissions to the NICU between groups.</p><p><strong>Conclusion: </strong>Diagnosis of borderline fetal growth at time of anatomy scan was associated with a significantly increased odds of progression to FGR at subsequent scan and delivery of a SGA neonate.</p>","PeriodicalId":7584,"journal":{"name":"American journal of perinatology","volume":" ","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":1.5000,"publicationDate":"2024-10-25","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Association of borderline fetal growth with progression to fetal growth restriction.\",\"authors\":\"Baillie Bronner, Monique Holod, Margaret Schermerhorn, Juliana Sung, Anna McCormick, Samantha de Los Reyes\",\"doi\":\"10.1055/a-2451-9118\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"<p><strong>Objective: </strong>To evaluate if an estimated fetal weight (EFW) between the 10-15th percentiles at time of anatomy ultrasound, referred to as borderline fetal growth, is associated with progression to fetal growth restriction (FGR) on subsequent ultrasound, delivery of a SGA neonate or neonatal intensive care (NICU) admission.</p><p><strong>Study design: </strong>We performed a secondary analysis using the Nulliparous Pregnancy Outcomes Study: Monitoring Mothers-to-Be data (NuMom2b). The exposures were normotensive pregnancies with non-anomalous singleton gestations with normal growth, defined as EFW >15th percentile at the anatomy scan compared to borderline fetal growth fetuses defined as those with an EFW in the 10-15th percentile. The primary outcome was FGR at subsequent ultrasound, defined as EFW or AC <10%. The secondary outcomes were NICU admission and small for gestational age (SGA) neonate. Univariable analyses were performed comparing maternal baseline demographic and clinical characteristics. Multivariable analysis was performed for the primary outcome with variables adjusted a priori for body mass index, smoking status, race/ethnicity, insurance status, and drug use.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>4883 patients met inclusion criteria with 114 in the borderline fetal growth group and 4769 in the normal growth group. There were no significant differences in maternal demographic or medical characteristics (Table 1). In adjusted multivariable analysis, patients with borderline growth had significantly higher odds of being diagnosed with FGR at their subsequent scan (aOR 6.68, CI 3.98-11.20) compared to those with normal growth. For secondary outcomes, patients with borderline fetal growth were significantly more likely to have SGA neonates (6.14% vs. 2.67%, p= 0.025). There was no difference in admissions to the NICU between groups.</p><p><strong>Conclusion: </strong>Diagnosis of borderline fetal growth at time of anatomy scan was associated with a significantly increased odds of progression to FGR at subsequent scan and delivery of a SGA neonate.</p>\",\"PeriodicalId\":7584,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"American journal of perinatology\",\"volume\":\" \",\"pages\":\"\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":1.5000,\"publicationDate\":\"2024-10-25\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"American journal of perinatology\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"3\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.1055/a-2451-9118\",\"RegionNum\":4,\"RegionCategory\":\"医学\",\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"Q3\",\"JCRName\":\"OBSTETRICS & GYNECOLOGY\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"American journal of perinatology","FirstCategoryId":"3","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1055/a-2451-9118","RegionNum":4,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q3","JCRName":"OBSTETRICS & GYNECOLOGY","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

摘要

目的目的:评估解剖超声检查时估计胎儿体重(EFW)在第10-15百分位数之间(被称为胎儿生长边缘)是否与后续超声检查中胎儿生长受限(FGR)的进展、SGA新生儿的分娩或新生儿重症监护室(NICU)的入院有关:研究设计:我们利用无子宫妊娠结局研究(Nulliparous Pregnancy Outcomes Study)的数据进行了二次分析:研究设计:我们利用无子宫妊娠结局研究:待产母亲监测数据(NuMom2b)进行了二次分析。研究对象为血压正常、非畸形单胎妊娠且发育正常的孕妇,即在解剖扫描时EFW>15百分位数的胎儿与EFW在10-15百分位数的边缘胎儿。主要结果是后续超声检查的 FGR,定义为 EFW 或 AC 结果:4883 名患者符合纳入标准,其中 114 人属于胎儿发育边缘组,4769 人属于正常发育组。产妇的人口统计学特征和医学特征无明显差异(表 1)。在调整后的多变量分析中,与发育正常的患者相比,发育边缘的患者在随后的扫描中被诊断为FGR的几率明显更高(aOR 6.68,CI 3.98-11.20)。在次要结果中,胎儿发育边缘的患者生出 SGA 新生儿的几率明显更高(6.14% 对 2.67%,P= 0.025)。各组间新生儿重症监护室的入院率没有差异:结论:解剖扫描时诊断为胎儿发育边缘与随后扫描时进展为FGR和分娩SGA新生儿的几率显著增加有关。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
Association of borderline fetal growth with progression to fetal growth restriction.

Objective: To evaluate if an estimated fetal weight (EFW) between the 10-15th percentiles at time of anatomy ultrasound, referred to as borderline fetal growth, is associated with progression to fetal growth restriction (FGR) on subsequent ultrasound, delivery of a SGA neonate or neonatal intensive care (NICU) admission.

Study design: We performed a secondary analysis using the Nulliparous Pregnancy Outcomes Study: Monitoring Mothers-to-Be data (NuMom2b). The exposures were normotensive pregnancies with non-anomalous singleton gestations with normal growth, defined as EFW >15th percentile at the anatomy scan compared to borderline fetal growth fetuses defined as those with an EFW in the 10-15th percentile. The primary outcome was FGR at subsequent ultrasound, defined as EFW or AC <10%. The secondary outcomes were NICU admission and small for gestational age (SGA) neonate. Univariable analyses were performed comparing maternal baseline demographic and clinical characteristics. Multivariable analysis was performed for the primary outcome with variables adjusted a priori for body mass index, smoking status, race/ethnicity, insurance status, and drug use.

Results: 4883 patients met inclusion criteria with 114 in the borderline fetal growth group and 4769 in the normal growth group. There were no significant differences in maternal demographic or medical characteristics (Table 1). In adjusted multivariable analysis, patients with borderline growth had significantly higher odds of being diagnosed with FGR at their subsequent scan (aOR 6.68, CI 3.98-11.20) compared to those with normal growth. For secondary outcomes, patients with borderline fetal growth were significantly more likely to have SGA neonates (6.14% vs. 2.67%, p= 0.025). There was no difference in admissions to the NICU between groups.

Conclusion: Diagnosis of borderline fetal growth at time of anatomy scan was associated with a significantly increased odds of progression to FGR at subsequent scan and delivery of a SGA neonate.

求助全文
通过发布文献求助,成功后即可免费获取论文全文。 去求助
来源期刊
American journal of perinatology
American journal of perinatology 医学-妇产科学
CiteScore
5.90
自引率
0.00%
发文量
302
审稿时长
4-8 weeks
期刊介绍: The American Journal of Perinatology is an international, peer-reviewed, and indexed journal publishing 14 issues a year dealing with original research and topical reviews. It is the definitive forum for specialists in obstetrics, neonatology, perinatology, and maternal/fetal medicine, with emphasis on bridging the different fields. The focus is primarily on clinical and translational research, clinical and technical advances in diagnosis, monitoring, and treatment as well as evidence-based reviews. Topics of interest include epidemiology, diagnosis, prevention, and management of maternal, fetal, and neonatal diseases. Manuscripts on new technology, NICU set-ups, and nursing topics are published to provide a broad survey of important issues in this field. All articles undergo rigorous peer review, with web-based submission, expedited turn-around, and availability of electronic publication. The American Journal of Perinatology is accompanied by AJP Reports - an Open Access journal for case reports in neonatology and maternal/fetal medicine.
×
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