Contingent versus routine third-trimester screening for late fetal growth restriction

29Citations
Citations of this article
84Readers
Mendeley users who have this article in their library.

This article is free to access.

Abstract

Objective To evaluate the use of third-trimester ultrasound screening for late fetal growth restriction (FGR) on a contingent basis, according to risk accrued in the second trimester, in an unselected population. Methods Maternal characteristics, fetal biometry and second-trimester uterine artery (UtA) Doppler were included in logistic regression analysis to estimate risk for late FGR (birth weight < 3rd percentile, or 3rd-10th percentile plus abnormal cerebroplacental ratio or UtA Doppler, with delivery ≥ 34 weeks). Based on the second-trimester risk, strategies for performing contingent third-trimester ultrasound examinations in 10%, 25% or 50% of the cohort were tested against a strategy of routine ultrasound scanning in the entire population at 32 + 0 to 33 + 6 weeks. Results Models were constructed based on 1393 patients and validated in 1303 patients, including 73 (5.2%) and 82 late FGR (6.3%) cases, respectively. At the second-trimester scan, the a-posteriori second-trimester risk (a-posteriori first-trimester risk (baseline a-priori risk and mean arterial blood pressure) combined with second-trimester abdominal circumference and UtA Doppler) yielded an area under the receiver-operating characteristics curve (AUC) of 0.81 (95% CI, 0.74-0.87) (detection rate (DR), 43.1% for a 10% false-positive rate (FPR)). The combination of a-posteriori second-trimester risk plus third-trimester estimated fetal weight (full model) yielded an AUC of 0.92 (95% CI, 0.88-0.96) (DR, 74% for a 10% FPR). Subjecting 10%, 25% or 50% of the study population to third-trimester ultrasound, based on a-posteriori second-trimester risk, gave AUCs of 0.81 (95% CI, 0.75-0.88), 0.84 (95% CI, 0.78-0.91) and 0.89 (95% CI, 0.84-0.94), respectively. Only the 50% contingent model proved statistically equivalent to performing routine third-trimester ultrasound scans (AUC, 0.92 (95% CI, 0.88-0.96), P = 0.11). Conclusion A strategy of selecting 50% of the study population to undergo third-trimester ultrasound examination, based on accrued risk in the second trimester, proved equivalent to routine third-trimester ultrasound scanning in predicting late FGR.

Cite

CITATION STYLE

APA

Triunfo, S., Crovetto, F., Scazzocchio, E., Parra-Saavedra, M., Gratacos, E., & Figueras, F. (2016). Contingent versus routine third-trimester screening for late fetal growth restriction. Ultrasound in Obstetrics and Gynecology, 47(1), 81–88. https://doi.org/10.1002/uog.15740

Register to see more suggestions

Mendeley helps you to discover research relevant for your work.

Already have an account?

Save time finding and organizing research with Mendeley

Sign up for free