z-logo
Premium
Fetal Weight Estimation Using Automated Fractional Limb Volume With 2‐Dimensional Size Parameters
Author(s) -
Lee Wesley,
Mack Lauren M.,
SangiHaghpeykar Haleh,
Gandhi Rajshi,
Wu Qingqing,
Kang Li,
Canavan Timothy P.,
Gatina Renata,
Schild Ralf L.
Publication year - 2020
Publication title -
journal of ultrasound in medicine
Language(s) - English
Resource type - Journals
SCImago Journal Rank - 0.574
H-Index - 91
eISSN - 1550-9613
pISSN - 0278-4297
DOI - 10.1002/jum.15224
Subject(s) - medicine , diaphysis , nuclear medicine , population , fetal weight , mean difference , ultrasound , sample size determination , reproducibility , birth weight , femur , confidence interval , statistics , surgery , pregnancy , mathematics , radiology , environmental health , biology , genetics
Objectives To develop new fetal weight prediction models using automated fractional limb volume (FLV). Methods A prospective multicenter study measured fetal biometry within 4 to 7 days of delivery. Three‐dimensional data acquisition included the automated FLV that was based on 50% of the humerus diaphysis (fractional arm volume [AVol]) or 50% of the femur diaphysis (fractional thigh volume [TVol]) length. A regression analysis provided population sample–specific coefficients to develop 4 weight estimation models. Estimated and actual birth weights (BWs) were compared for the mean percent difference ± standard deviation of the percent differences. Systematic errors were analyzed by the Student t test, and random errors were compared by the Pitman test. Results A total of 328 pregnancies were scanned before delivery (BW range, 825–5470 g). Only 71.3% to 72.6% of weight estimations were within 10% of actual BW using original published models by Hadlock et al ( Am J Obstet Gynecol 1985; 151:333–337) and INTERGROWTH‐21st ( Ultrasound Obstet Gynecol 2017; 49:478–486). All predictions were accurate by using sample‐specific model coefficients to minimize bias in making these comparisons (Hadlock, 0.4% ± 8.7%; INTERGROWTH‐21st, 0.5% ± 10.0%; AVol, 0.3% ± 7.4%; and TVol, 0.3% ± 8.0%). Both AVol‐ and TVol‐based models improved the percentage of correctly classified BW ±10% in 83.2% and 83.9% of cases, respectively, compared to the INTERGROWTH‐21st model (73.8%; P  < .01). For BW of less than 2500 g, all models slightly overestimated BW (+2.0% to +3.1%). For BW of greater than 4000 g, AVol (–2.4% ± 6.5%) and TVol (–2.3% ± 6.9%) models) had weight predictions with small systematic errors that were not different from zero ( P  > .05). For these larger fetuses, both AVol and TVol models correctly classified BW (±10%) in 83.3% and 87.5% of cases compared to the others (Hadlock, 79.2%; INTERGROWTH‐21st, 70.8%) although these differences did not reach statistical significance. Conclusions In this cohort, the inclusion of automated FLV measurements with conventional 2‐dimensional biometry was generally associated with improved weight predictions.

This content is not available in your region!

Continue researching here.

Having issues? You can contact us here