Fetal growth in low-risk Indian population at a tertiary centre and its comparison with INTERGROWTH-21 standards: a prospective cohort study


  • Anoosha K. Ravi Department of Obstetrics and Gynecology, Maulana Azad Medical College, New Delhi, India
  • Krishna Agarwal Department of Obstetrics and Gynecology, Maulana Azad Medical College, New Delhi, India
  • Siddarth Ramji Department of Neonatology, Maulana Azad Medical College, New Delhi, India
  • Sreenivas Vishnubhatla Department of Biostatistics, All India Institute of Medical Sciences, New Delhi, India




Abdominal circumference, Biparietal diameter, Femur length, Intrauterine fetal growth, Percentile charts, Ultrasound parameters


Background: The objective of this study was to compare the fetal growth pattern in low risk Indian population with the INTERGROWTH-21 standards.

Methods: Low risk women were enrolled at 10 to 20 weeks of gestation and followed up until delivery. An experienced operator performed abdominal ultrasound every 5±1 week and measured biparietal diameter (BPD), head circumference (HC), abdominal circumference (AC) and femur length (FL) of the fetus. Newborn anthropometric measurements were taken within 12 hours of childbirth.

Results: A total of 126 healthy women, enrolled at mean gestation of 16.8±1.6 weeks, completed the follow up until delivery. None of the participants developed any major obstetric or medical morbidity. The study subjects showed lower mean z scores for BPD (-0.7±1.3), HC (-0.4±1.3) and AC (-0.4±1.3) but a higher mean z-score for FL (0.3±1.7) as compared to INTERGROWTH-21 standards. From 1st through 5th visit, the z scores for BPD and HC improved whereas declined for AC and FL.

Conclusions: The fetal growth in non-affluent healthy Indian women had a lower fetal growth compared to INTERGROWTH-21 standards.


Alexander GR, Himes JH, Kaufman RB, Mor J, Koqan M. A united states national reference for fetal growth. Obstet Gynaecol. 1996;87(2):163-8.

Brenner WE, Edelman DA, Hendricks CG. A standard of fetal growth for the United States of America. Am J Obstet Gynaecol. 1976;126:555.

De Onis M, Martorell R, Garza C, Lartey A. WHO child growth standards based on length/height, weight and age. Acta Paediatrica. 2006;450:76-85.

Papageorghiou AT, Ohuma EO, Altman DG, Todros T, Ismail LC, Lambert A, et al. International standards for fetal growth based on serial ultrasound measurements: the fetal growth longitudinal study of the INTERGROWTH-21st project. The Lancet. 2014;384(9946):869-79.

Villar J, Papageorghiou AT, Pang R, Ohuma EO, Ismail LC, Barros FC, et al. The likeness of fetal growth and newborn size across non-isolated populations in the INTERGROWTH-21st Project: the fetal growth longitudinal study and newborn cross-sectional study. The Lancet Diab Endocrinol. 2014;2(10):781-92.

Gould JB, Madan A, Qin C, Chavez G. Perinatal outcomes in two dissimilar immigrant populations in the United States: a dual epidemiologic paradox. Pediatr. 2003;111(6 Pt 1):e676-82.

Gardosi J, Figueras F, Clausson B, Francis A. The customised growth potential:an international research tool to study the epidemiology of fetal growth. Paediatr Perinat Epidemiol. 2011;25(1):2-10.

Unterscheider J, Geary MP, Daly S, McAuliffe FM, Kennelly MM, Dornan J, et al. The customized fetal growth potential: a standard for Ireland. Eu J Obstet Gynecol Repro Biol. 2013 Jan 1;166(1):14-7.






Original Research Articles