Abdominal circumference: a single measurement versus growth rate in the prediction of intrapartum Cesarean section for fetal distress
- 1 June 2001
- journal article
- research article
- Published by Wiley in Ultrasound in Obstetrics & Gynecology
- Vol. 17 (6) , 493-495
- https://doi.org/10.1046/j.1469-0705.2001.00406.x
Abstract
The fetal abdominal circumference is the most sensitive ultrasound biometric measurement for predicting intrauterine growth restriction, which is associated with an increased risk of intrapartum fetal distress. We sought to evaluate and compare whether a third-trimester ultrasound measurement of abdominal circumference made within 1 week prior to delivery better predicts operative delivery for fetal distress when compared with the growth velocity of the abdominal circumference in the third trimester. Retrospective analysis was carried out of prospectively collected ultrasound data on 117 patients with singleton gestations who had had at least two ultrasound assessments performed less than 6 weeks apart in the third trimester, with the last ultrasound performed within 1 week prior to delivery. The abdominal circumference value of the last ultrasound prior to delivery was placed into one of three categories: ≤ 5% centile, > 5 to ≤ 10% centile and > 10% centile for gestational age. The growth velocity of the abdominal circumference per week was placed into one of three categories: ≤ 5 mm/week, 6–10 mm/week and ≥ 11 mm/week. The chi-squared test was used to compare differences between the incidence of fetal distress between the groups. The incidences of Cesarean section for fetal distress in relation to a single measurement of the abdominal circumference were: ≤ 5% centile, 8/23 (35%); > 5 to ≤ 10% centile, 3/12 (25%); > 10% centile, 8/81 (10%) (P < 0.05). The incidences of Cesarean section for fetal distress with the three abdominal circumference growth velocities were: ≤ 5 mm/week, 9/55 (16%); 6–10 mm/week, 4/11 (36%); ≥ 11 mm/week, 8/51 (16%) (P = 0.9401). A single measure of the fetal abdominal circumference made within 1 week prior to delivery is superior to an assessment of growth rate of the fetal abdomen in the third trimester in discriminating patients who require Cesarean section for fetal distress. Copyright © 2001 International Society of Ultrasound in Obstetrics and GynecologyKeywords
This publication has 12 references indexed in Scilit:
- Are babies of normal birth weight who fail to reach their growth potential as diagnosed by ultrasound at increased risk?Ultrasound in Obstetrics & Gynecology, 1995
- Prediction of perinatal morbidity at term in small fetuses: comparison of fetal growth and Doppler ultrasoundBJOG: An International Journal of Obstetrics and Gynaecology, 1994
- Evidence of growth retardation in neonates of apparently normal weightEuropean Journal of Obstetrics & Gynecology and Reproductive Biology, 1992
- Is obstetric and neonatal outcome worse in fetuses who fail to reach their own growth potential?BJOG: An International Journal of Obstetrics and Gynaecology, 1992
- Ponderal Index: A Better Definition of the ‘At Risk’ Group With Intrauterine Growth Problems than Birth‐weight for Gestational Age in Term InfantsAustralian and New Zealand Journal of Obstetrics and Gynaecology, 1991
- Abnormal velocity waveforms of the umbilical artery in growth retarded fetuses: relationship to antepartum late heart rate decelerations and outcomeEarly Human Development, 1990
- Intrauterine growth retardation: Let's be clear about itBJOG: An International Journal of Obstetrics and Gynaecology, 1989
- A comparison of fetal abdominal circumference measurements and Doppler ultrasound in the prediction of small‐for‐dates babies and fetal compromiseBJOG: An International Journal of Obstetrics and Gynaecology, 1989
- Umbilical artery velocity waveforms: poor association with small‐for‐gestational‐age babiesBJOG: An International Journal of Obstetrics and Gynaecology, 1989
- Fetal malnutrition: Its incidence, causes, and effectsAmerican Journal of Obstetrics and Gynecology, 1966