DOI: http://dx.doi.org/10.18203/2320-1770.ijrcog20180178

Comparison of ultrasound parameters for diagnosis of IUGR

Pardeshi Yogeshwari Gangadhar, Nancy S. Pillai

Abstract


Background: An active approach to the diagnosis of IUGR should be undertaken so that the foetus can be closely monitored and when indicated, be promptly delivered.

Methods: Study was conducted at Department of Obstetrics and Gynaecology, Pushpagiri Institute of Medical Sciences, Thiruvalla. All pregnant women whose gestational ages were assessed by ultrasonography in 1st trimester was included in the study. An ultrasonographic biometric evaluation was done between 22-24 weeks and repeated at 32-34 weeks of gestational age and their ratios compared, using standard formulae.

Results: We has observed that at 22-24 weeks of gestational age abdominal circumference (AC) has a better sensitivity, specificity, NPV and PPV when compared with femur length (FL), head circumference (HC), FL/AC and HC/AC. AC has got lowest FP and FN with a highest accuracy rate of 83% as compared to FL, HC, FL/AC and HC/AC at 22-24 weeks of gestational age. At 32-34 weeks of gestational age AC remains better in sensitivity, specificity, NPV, PPV, FP and FN values as compared to FL, HC, FL/AC and HC/AC.

Conclusions: AC has a better sensitivity, specificity, NPV and PPV for diagnosis of IUGR when compared with FL, HC, FL/AC and HC/AC. AC has got lowest FP and FN with a highest accuracy rate at both 22-24 weeks of gestational age and 32-34 weeks of gestational age. The sensitivity, specificity and accuracy of AC is more at 32-34 weeks of gestation than at 22-24 weeks for diagnosis of IUGR.


Keywords


Abdominal circumference, Fetal growth restriction, IUGR, Ultrasound parameters

Full Text:

PDF

References


Lubchenco LO, Hansman C, Dressler M. Intrauterine growth as estimated from live born birth-weight data at 24 to 42 weeks of gestation. Pediatr. 1963;32:793.

William J. Meyer, Daniel Gauthier, Viswanthan Ramakrishan, Judy Sipos. Ultrasonographic detection of abnormal fetal growth with the gestational ageindependent,transverse cerebellar diameter/abdominal circumference ratio. Am J Obstet Gynecol. 1994;171:1057-63.

Lin CC, Su SJ, River LP. Comparison of associated high-risk factors and perinatal outcome between symmetric and asymmetric fetal intrauterine growth retardation.Am J Obstet Gynecol. 1991;164:1535.

Bonnar J, Redman CWG, Sheppard BL. Treatment of fetal growth retardation in utero with heparin and dipyridamole. Eur J Obstet Gynec Reprod Biol. 1975;5:123.

Varman TR, Curzen P. The effects of abdominal decompression on pregnancy complicated by the small-for-dates fetus. J Obstet Gynec Br Commonwealth. 1973;80:1086.

Campbell S. The pregnancy at risk. Clinics in perinatology. In: Milunsky A, eds. W. B. Saunders and Co. Ltd. Philadelphia; 1974;1(2):507.

Warsof SLK, Cooper DJ, Little D, Campbell S. Routine ultrasound screening for antenatal detection of intrauterine growth retardation. Obstet Gynecol 1986;67:33-9.

Chang TC, Robson SC, Boys RJ, Spencer JAD. Prediction of the small for gestational age infant: which ultrasonic measurement is best? Obstet Gynecol. 1992;80:1030-8.

Ott WJ. Diagnosis of intrauterine growth restriction: comparison of ultrasound parameters. Am J Perinatol. 2002;19(3):133-7.

Campbell S, Thomas A. Ultrasound measurement of the fetal head to abdomen circumference ratio in the assessment of growth retardation. Br J Obstet Gynaecol. 1977;84:165-74.

Hadlock FP, Deter RL, Harrist RB, Roecker E, Park SK. A date-independent predictor of intrauterine growth retardation: femur length/abdominal circumference ratio. Am J Roentgenol. 1983;141:979.

Jeanty P, Cousaert E, Cantraine F. Normal growth of abdominal perimeter. Am J Perinatol. 1984;1:129.

Vintzileos AM, Neckles S, Campbell WA, Andreoli JW, Kaplan BM, Nochimson DJ. Ultrasound fetal thigh-calf circumference and gestational age independent fetal ratios in normal pregnancy. J Ultrasound Med. 1985;4:287-92.

Divon MY, Paul F. Chamberlain, Louise Sipos, Frank A. Manning, Lawrence D. Platt. Identification of the small for gestational age fetus with the use of gestational age- independent indices of growth. Int J Obstet Gynecol. 1986;155:1197-201.

David C, Gabrielli S, Pillu G, Bovicelli S. Head to abdominal circumference ration: a reappraisal. Ultrasound Obstet Gynecol. 1995;5(4):256-9.

Hadlock FP, Deter RL. A date-independent predictor of intrauterine growth retardation: femur length/abdominal circumference ratio. AJR. 141:979-84.

Hadlock FP, Harrist RB, Carpenter RJ. Sonographic estimation of fetal weight. The value of femur length in addition to head and abdomen measurements. Radiol. 1984;150(2):535-40.

Brown HL, Miller JM Jr,Gabert HA and Kissling G. Ultrasonic recognition of the small for gestational age fetus. Obstetric Gynacol. 1987;69;631-5.

Kurjak, Asim, Kirkinen, Pertti. Biometric and dynamic ultrasound assessment of small-for-dates infants: report of 260 cases. Obstet Gynecol. 1980;56(3):281-4.

Platz E, Newman R. Diagnosis of IUGR: Traditional biometry. Semin Perinatol. 2008;32:140.

Koops BL, Morgan, Battaglia FC. Neonatal mortality risk in relation to birth weight and gestational age: Update. J Pediatr. 1982;101:969.

Williams Obstetrics. Fetal growth disorder, 22nd ed, McGraw Hill; 2005;(38):895-904.

Benson CB, Doubilet PM, Saltzman DH. Intrauterine growth retardation: Predictive value of ultrasound criteria for antenatal diagnosis. Radiol. 1986;160:415-26.