Ultrasonographic measurement of placental thickness and its correlation with estimated fetal weight
DOI:
https://doi.org/10.18203/2320-1770.ijrcog20175863Keywords:
Estimated fetal weight, Placental thickness, Umblical cord insertionAbstract
Background: The human placenta develops with the principal function of providing nutrients and oxygen to the fetus. Objective of present study was to assess the relationship between placental thickness with estimated fetal weight.
Methods: The present study was a prospective observational study and includes 152 pregnant women with known last menstrual period, history of regular menstruation, singleton pregnancy and aged between 20 and 35 years. After Institutional Ethics Committee approval all recruited women were observed for baseline demographic and obstetric data including age, parity and past medical events at first antenatal visit. All women provided an informed written consent and underwent ultrasound evaluation of placental thickness at 18 to 40 weeks of gestation.
Results: In the present study the mean placental thickness between the ranges of 18-40mm was 31.63±4.79mm and the mean estimated fetal birth weight was 2145.86±121.24grams. The pearson’s correlation coefficient between the two was 0.982. Thus, proving the significant positive correlation between placental thickness and estimated fetal birth weight (p-value <0.001).
Conclusions: Estimated fetal weight is a very important component of antenatal care in which ultrasonography plays an important role. Placental thickness measured at the level of umblical cord insertion can be used as an accurate sonographic indicator in the assessment of fetal weight because of its linear correlation. Therefore, it can be used as an additional sonographic tool in assessing fetal weight.
References
Suri S, Muttukrishna S, Jauniaux E. 2D-ultrasound and endocrinologic evaluation of placentation in early pregnancy and its relationship to fetal birthweight in normal pregnancies and pre- eclampsia. Placenta. 2013;34(9):745-50.
Azpurua H, Funai EF, Coraluzzi LM, Doherty LF, Sasson IE, Kliman M, et al. Determination of placental weight using two- dimensional sonography and volumetric mathematic modeling. Am J Perinatol. 2010;27(2):151-5.
Salafia CM, Zhang J, Miller RK, Charles AK, Shrout P, Sun W.Placental growth patterns affect birth weight for given placental weight. Birth Defects Res Clin Mol Teratol. 2007;79(4):281-8
Hoddick WK, Mahony BS, Callen PW, Filly RA. Placental thickness. J Ultrasound Med 1985;4(9):479-82.
Pinette MG, Pan T, Blackstone J, Pinette SG. Ultrasound Placental thickness measurements and pregnancy outcomes. Am J Obstet Gynecol. 1998;178 (supp l):S167
Dombrowski MP, Wolfie HM, Salch A, Evans Mt. O Brien J. The sonographically thick placenta: a predictor of increased perinatal morbidity and mortality. Ultrasound Obstet Gynecol. 1992;2:252-5.
Kaushal L, Patil A, Kocherla K. Evaluation of placental thickness as a sonological indicator for estimation of gestational age of fetus in normal singleton pregnancy. International J Res Med Sci. 2015;3(5):1213-8.
Adhikari R, Deka PK, Tayal A, Chettri PK. Ultrasonographic evaluation of placental thickness in normal singleton pregnancy for estimation of gestational age. Int J Med Imaging. 2015;3(6):143-7.
Afrakhteh M, Moini A, Sanei M, Raza H. Correlation between placental thickness in the second and third trimester and fetal weight. Rev bras Gynaecol Obstet. 2013;35(7):317-23.
Ohagwa CC, Abu PO, Ezeokeke UO,Ugwa AC. Placental thickness a sonographic indicator of gestational age. Internet J Med Update. 2009;4(2):9-14.
Kinare AS, Natekar AS, Chinchwadkar MC, Yanik CS, Fall CH et al. Low midpregnancy placental volume in rural Indian women: a cause for low birth weight. Am Journal Obstet Gynecol. 2000;182(2):443-8.
Clapp JF 3rd, Rizk KH, Appleby-Wineberg SK, Crass JR. Second- trimester placental volumes predicts birth weight at term. J Soc Gynecol Investig. 1995;2(1):19-22.
