z-logo
Premium
Contingent versus routine third‐trimester screening for late fetal growth restriction
Author(s) -
Triunfo S.,
Crovetto F.,
Scazzocchio E.,
ParraSaavedra M.,
Gratacos E.,
Figueras F.
Publication year - 2016
Publication title -
ultrasound in obstetrics and gynecology
Language(s) - English
Resource type - Journals
SCImago Journal Rank - 3.202
H-Index - 141
eISSN - 1469-0705
pISSN - 0960-7692
DOI - 10.1002/uog.15740
Subject(s) - medicine , fetal growth , third trimester , obstetrics , growth restriction , first trimester , fetus , gynecology , pregnancy , genetics , biology
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 < 3 rd percentile, or 3 rd –10 th 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 . Copyright © 2015 ISUOG. Published by John Wiley & Sons Ltd.

This content is not available in your region!

Continue researching here.

Having issues? You can contact us here
Accelerating Research

Address

John Eccles House
Robert Robinson Avenue,
Oxford Science Park, Oxford
OX4 4GP, United Kingdom