The impact of optimal dating on the assessment of fetal growth
- PMID: 33639870
- PMCID: PMC7912534
- DOI: 10.1186/s12884-021-03640-9
The impact of optimal dating on the assessment of fetal growth
Abstract
Background: The impact of using the Intergrowth (IG) dating formulae in comparison to the commonly used Robinson dating on the evaluation of biometrics and estimated fetal weight (EFW) has not been evaluated.
Methods: Nationwide cross-sectional study of routine fetal ultrasound biometry in low-risk pregnant women whose gestational age (GA) had been previously assessed by a first trimester CRL measurement. We compared the CRL-based GA according to the Robinson formula and the IG formula. We evaluated the fetal biometric measurements as well as the EFW taken later in pregnancy depending on the dating formula used. Mean and standard deviation of the Z scores as well as the number and percentage of cases classified as <3rd, < 10th, >90th and > 97th percentile were compared.
Results: Three thousand five hundred twenty-two low-risk women with scans carried out after 18 weeks were included. There were differences of zero, one and 2 days in 642 (18.2%), 2700 (76.7%) and 180 (5%) when GA was estimated based on the Robinson or the IG formula, respectively. The biometry Z scores assessed later in pregnancy were all statistically significantly lower when the Intergrowth-based dating formula was used (p < 10- 4). Likewise, the number and percentage of foetuses classified as <3rd, < 10th, >90th and > 97th percentile demonstrated significant differences. As an example, the proportion of SGA foetuses varied from 3.46 to 4.57% (p = 0.02) and that of LGA foetuses from 17.86 to 13.4% (p < 10- 4).
Conclusion: The dating formula used has a quite significant impact on the subsequent evaluation of biometry and EFW. We suggest that the combined and homogeneous use of a recent dating standard, together with prescriptive growth standards established on the same low-risk pregnancies, allows an optimal assessment of fetal growth.
Keywords: CRL; Dating; EFW; Fetal; Growth; Integrowth.
Conflict of interest statement
N/A
Figures
Similar articles
-
Single and Serial Fetal Biometry to Detect Preterm and Term Small- and Large-for-Gestational-Age Neonates: A Longitudinal Cohort Study.PLoS One. 2016 Nov 1;11(11):e0164161. doi: 10.1371/journal.pone.0164161. eCollection 2016. PLoS One. 2016. PMID: 27802270 Free PMC article.
-
Two-stage approach for prediction of small-for-gestational-age neonate and adverse perinatal outcome by routine ultrasound examination at 35-37 weeks' gestation.Ultrasound Obstet Gynecol. 2019 Oct;54(4):484-491. doi: 10.1002/uog.20391. Epub 2019 Aug 27. Ultrasound Obstet Gynecol. 2019. PMID: 31271475
-
Impact of replacing Chinese ethnicity-specific fetal biometry charts with the INTERGROWTH-21(st) standard.BJOG. 2016 Sep;123 Suppl 3:48-55. doi: 10.1111/1471-0528.14008. BJOG. 2016. PMID: 27627597
-
Prediction of adverse perinatal outcome by fetal biometry: comparison of customized and population-based standards.Ultrasound Obstet Gynecol. 2020 Feb;55(2):177-188. doi: 10.1002/uog.20299. Ultrasound Obstet Gynecol. 2020. PMID: 31006913 Free PMC article.
-
Fetal biometry to assess the size and growth of the fetus.Best Pract Res Clin Obstet Gynaecol. 2018 May;49:3-15. doi: 10.1016/j.bpobgyn.2018.02.005. Epub 2018 Feb 23. Best Pract Res Clin Obstet Gynaecol. 2018. PMID: 29605157 Review.
Cited by
-
Prediction of birthweight with early and mid-pregnancy antenatal markers utilising machine learning and explainable artificial intelligence.Sci Rep. 2025 Jul 19;15(1):26223. doi: 10.1038/s41598-025-11837-7. Sci Rep. 2025. PMID: 40683960 Free PMC article.
-
Targeted newborn metabolomics: prediction of gestational age from cord blood.J Perinatol. 2022 Feb;42(2):181-186. doi: 10.1038/s41372-021-01253-w. Epub 2022 Jan 24. J Perinatol. 2022. PMID: 35067676 Free PMC article.
References
-
- Martins JG, Biggio JR, Abuhamad A. Society for maternal-fetal medicine (SMFM) consult series #52: diagnosis and management of fetal growth restriction. Am J Obstet Gynecol. 2020:S0002937820305354. 10.1016/j.ajog.2020.05.010. - PubMed
MeSH terms
LinkOut - more resources
Full Text Sources
Other Literature Sources
Medical
Research Materials