Prediction of Small for Gestational Age: Accuracy of Different Sonographic Fetal Weight Estimation Formulas
- PMID: 26942906
- DOI: 10.1159/000443881
Prediction of Small for Gestational Age: Accuracy of Different Sonographic Fetal Weight Estimation Formulas
Abstract
Objective: To compare the accuracy of various sonographic estimated fetal weight (sEFW) formulas for the prediction of small for gestational age (SGA) neonates.
Methods: A retrospective analysis of 6,126 fetal biometrical measurements performed within 3 days of delivery. SGA prediction was evaluated for various sEFW formulas by calculating the sensitivity, specificity, positive/negative predictive value (PPV/NPV), likelihood ratio (+LR/-LR), overall accuracy and area under the receiver operating characteristic curve (AUC). Systematic error, random error, proportion of estimates >10% of birth weights, actual and absolute weight differences were compared between SGA and non-SGA neonates.
Results: Overall, 638 (10.4%) neonates were SGA. There was considerable variation among formulas in sensitivity (mean ± SD, 62 ± 14.4%; range, 32.4-91.2), PPV (72.5 ± 10.7%; 45.8-95.6) and +LR (24.2 ± 10.9; 7.2-57.3), mild variation in specificity (96.6 ± 2.7%; 87.4-99.4), NPV (94.6 ± 5.3%; 72.2-98.9) and -LR (0.4 ± 0.1; 0.1-0.7) and minimal variation in AUC (mean, 0.93; range, 0.91-0.93). The majority of formulas had a lower accuracy for the SGA neonates, with systematic error and random error ranging from -4.2 to 14.3% and from 8.4 to 12.9% for SGA, and from -8.7 to 16.1% and from 7.2 to 10.5% for non-SGA, respectively.
Conclusion: sEFW formulas differ in their accuracy for SGA prediction. In our population, the most accurate formula for SGA prediction was Hadlock's formula utilizing femur length, abdominal and head circumference.
© 2016 S. Karger AG, Basel.
Similar articles
-
Different formulas, different thresholds and different performance-the prediction of macrosomia by ultrasound.J Perinatol. 2017 Dec;37(12):1285-1291. doi: 10.1038/jp.2017.134. Epub 2017 Sep 14. J Perinatol. 2017. PMID: 28906497
-
Prediction of large for gestational age by various sonographic fetal weight estimation formulas-which should we use?J Perinatol. 2017 May;37(5):513-517. doi: 10.1038/jp.2017.5. Epub 2017 Feb 2. J Perinatol. 2017. PMID: 28151496
-
Evaluation of Fetal Weight Estimation Formulas in Assessing Small-for-Gestational-Age Fetuses.Ultraschall Med. 2016 Jun;37(3):283-9. doi: 10.1055/s-0034-1384907. Epub 2014 Jul 30. Ultraschall Med. 2016. PMID: 25075910 English.
-
Ultrasonic estimation of fetal weight: use of targeted formulas in small for gestational age fetuses.Obstet Gynecol. 1993 Sep;82(3):359-64. Obstet Gynecol. 1993. PMID: 8355934 Review.
-
Sonographic examination does not predict twin growth discordance accurately.Obstet Gynecol. 1997 Apr;89(4):529-33. doi: 10.1016/S0029-7844(97)00010-0. Obstet Gynecol. 1997. PMID: 9083307 Review.
Cited by
-
Biochemical tests of placental function versus ultrasound assessment of fetal size for stillbirth and small-for-gestational-age infants.Cochrane Database Syst Rev. 2019 May 14;5(5):CD012245. doi: 10.1002/14651858.CD012245.pub2. Cochrane Database Syst Rev. 2019. PMID: 31087568 Free PMC article.
-
Development and validation of prediction models for fetal growth restriction and birthweight: an individual participant data meta-analysis.Health Technol Assess. 2024 Aug;28(47):1-119. doi: 10.3310/DABW4814. Health Technol Assess. 2024. PMID: 39252507 Free PMC article.
-
Different formulas, different thresholds and different performance-the prediction of macrosomia by ultrasound.J Perinatol. 2017 Dec;37(12):1285-1291. doi: 10.1038/jp.2017.134. Epub 2017 Sep 14. J Perinatol. 2017. PMID: 28906497
-
The Accuracy of Sonographically Estimated Fetal Weight and Prediction of Small for Gestational Age in Twin Pregnancy-Comparison of the First and Second Twins.J Clin Med. 2023 May 6;12(9):3307. doi: 10.3390/jcm12093307. J Clin Med. 2023. PMID: 37176747 Free PMC article.
-
Accuracy of sonographic fetal biometry in estimating intertwin size discordance at birth.Int J Gynaecol Obstet. 2025 Aug;170(2):621-631. doi: 10.1002/ijgo.70036. Epub 2025 Mar 4. Int J Gynaecol Obstet. 2025. PMID: 40035322 Free PMC article.
MeSH terms
LinkOut - more resources
Full Text Sources
Other Literature Sources