Skip to main page content
U.S. flag

An official website of the United States government

Dot gov

The .gov means it’s official.
Federal government websites often end in .gov or .mil. Before sharing sensitive information, make sure you’re on a federal government site.

Https

The site is secure.
The https:// ensures that you are connecting to the official website and that any information you provide is encrypted and transmitted securely.

Access keys NCBI Homepage MyNCBI Homepage Main Content Main Navigation
. 2015 Jun 25:15:141.
doi: 10.1186/s12884-015-0569-1.

Unconditional and conditional standards for fetal abdominal circumference and estimated fetal weight in an ethnic Chinese population: a birth cohort study

Affiliations

Unconditional and conditional standards for fetal abdominal circumference and estimated fetal weight in an ethnic Chinese population: a birth cohort study

Ying Xu et al. BMC Pregnancy Childbirth. .

Abstract

Background: Diagnosis of intrauterine fetal growth restriction and prediction of small-for-gestation age are often based on fetal abdominal circumference or estimated fetal weight (EFW). The present study aims to create unconditional (cross-sectional) and conditional (longitudinal) standards of fetal abdominal circumference and EFW for use in an ethnic Chinese population.

Methods: In the Growing Up in Singapore Towards healthy Outcome (GUSTO) birth cohort study in Singapore, fetal biometric measurements were obtained at enrolment to antenatal care (11-12 weeks) and up to three more time points during pregnancy. Singleton pregnancies with a healthy profile defined by maternal, pregnancy and fetal characteristics and birth outcomes were selected for this analysis. The Hadlock algorithm was used to calculate EFW. Mixed effects model was used to establish unconditional and conditional standards in z-scores and percentiles for both genders pooled and for each gender separately.

Results: A total of 313 women were included, of whom 294 had 3 and 19 had 2 ultrasound scans other than the gestational age dating scan. Fetal abdominal circumference showed a roughly linear trajectory from 18 to 36 weeks of gestation, while EFW showed an accelerating trajectory. Gender differences were more pronounced in the 10(th) percentile than the 50(th) or 90(th) percentiles. As compared to other published charts, this population showed growth trajectories that started low but caught up at later gestations.

Conclusions: Unconditional and conditional standards for monitoring fetal size and fetal growth in terms of abdominal circumference and EFW are available for this ethnic-Chinese population. Electronic spreadsheets are provided for their implementation.

PubMed Disclaimer

Figures

Fig. 1
Fig. 1
Unconditional chart for abdominal circumference pooling both genders (solid lines: 5th, 50th and 95th percentiles; long dashed lines: 10th and 90th percentiles; short dashed lines: 25th and 75th percentiles). Tick marks at multiples of 5 mm from 100 to 350 mm on the vertical axis, and at single day on the horizontal axis
Fig. 2
Fig. 2
Unconditional gender-specific 10th, 50th and 90th percentiles for abdominal circumference (solid lines for males and broken lines for females)
Fig. 3
Fig. 3
Unconditional chart for estimated fetal weight (EFW) pooling both genders (solid lines: 5th, 50th and 95th percentiles; long dashed lines: 10th and 90th percentiles; short dashed lines: 25th and 75th percentiles). Tick marks at multiples of 50 grams from 100 to 3200 grams on the vertical axis, and at single day on the horizontal axis
Fig. 4
Fig. 4
Unconditional gender-specific 10th, 50th and 90th percentiles for estimated fetal weight (EFW) (solid lines for males and broken lines for females)
Fig. 5
Fig. 5
Conditional versus unconditional EFW standards for participant ID “020-66086”: a foetus (●) whose EFW was 1138 grams at gestational age of 27.7 weeks (i.e. 27 weeks + 5 days) and 2024 grams at gestational age of 33.7 weeks (i.e. 33 weeks + 5 days). (Broken lines from bottom to top: unconditional 10th, 50th and 90th percentiles. Solid lines from bottom to top: conditional 10th, 50th and 90th percentiles)

References

    1. Barker DJP. Mothers, Babies and Health in Later Life. 2. Edinburgh: Churchill Livingstone; 1998.
    1. Cnattingius S, Haglund B, Kramer MS. Differences in late fetal death rates in association with determinants of small for gestational age fetuses: population based cohort study. BMJ. 1998;316:1483–7. doi: 10.1136/bmj.316.7143.1483. - DOI - PMC - PubMed
    1. Roth S, Chang TC, Robson S, Spencer JA, Wyatt JS, Stewart AL. The neurodevelopmental outcome of term infants with different intrauterine growth characteristics. Early Hum Dev. 1999;55:39–50. doi: 10.1016/S0378-3782(99)00002-X. - DOI - PubMed
    1. Kramer MS. The epidemiology of adverse pregnancy outcomes: an overview. J Nutr. 2003;133(5 Suppl 2):1592S–6. - PubMed
    1. Seravalli V, Block-Abraham DM, Turan OM, Doyle LE, Blitzer MG, Baschat AA. Second trimester prediction of delivery of a small-for-gestational-age neonate: integrating sequential Doppler information, fetal biometry, and maternal characteristics. Prenat Diagn. 2014 May 24. doi: 10.1002/pd.4418. [Epub ahead of print]. - PubMed

Publication types

MeSH terms