Diagnostic performance of 32 vs 36 weeks ultrasound in predicting late-onset fetal growth restriction and small-for-gestational-age neonates: a systematic review and meta-analysis

OBJECTIVE: Fetal growth restriction is an independent risk factor for fetal death and adverse neonatal outcomes. The main aim of this study was to investigate the diagnostic performance of 32 vs 36 weeks ultrasound of fetal biometry in detecting late-onset fetal growth restriction and predicting small-for-gestational-age neonates.DATA SOURCES: A systematic search was performed to identify relevant studies published until June 2022, using the databases PubMed, Web of Science, and Scopus.STUDY ELIGIBILITY CRITERIA: Cohort studies in low-risk or unselected singleton pregnancies with screening ultrasound performed at >= 32 weeks of gestation were used.METHODS: The estimated fetal weight and abdominal circumference were assessed as index tests for the prediction of small for gestational age (birthweight of <10th percentile) and detecting fetal growth restriction (estimated fetal weight of <10th percentile and/or abdominal circumference of <10th percentile). The quality of the included studies was independently assessed by 2 reviewers using the Quality Assessment of Diagnostic Accuracy Studies 2 tool. For the meta-analysis, hierarchical summary area under the receiver operating characteristic curves were constructed, and quantitative data synthesis was performed using random-effects models.RESULTS: The analysis included 25 studies encompassing 73,981 low-risk pregnancies undergoing third-trimester ultrasound assessment for growth, of which 5380 neonates (7.3%) were small for gestational age at birth. The pooled sensitivities for estimated fetal weight of <10th percentile and abdominal circumference of <10th percentile in predicting small for gestational age were 36% (95% confidence interval, 27%-46%) and 37% (95% confidence interval, 19%-60%), respectively, at 32 weeks ultrasound and 48% (95% confidence interval, 41%-56%) and 50% (95% confidence interval, 25%-74%), respectively, at 36 weeks ultrasound. The pooled specificities for estimated fetal weight of <10th percentile and abdominal circumference of <10th percentile in detecting small for gestational age were 93% (95% confidence interval, 91%-95%) and 95% (95% confidence interval, 85%-98%), respectively, at 32 weeks ultrasound and 93% (95% confidence interval, 91%-95%) and 97% (95% confidence interval, 85%-98%), respectively, at 36 weeks ultrasound. The observed diagnostic odds ratios for an estimated fetal weight of <10th percentile and an abdominal circumference of <10th percentile in detecting small for gestational age were 8.8 (95% confidence interval, 5.4-14.4) and 11.6 (95% confidence interval, 6.2-21.6), respectively, at 32 weeks ultrasound and 13.3 (95% confidence interval, 10.4-16.9) and 36.0 (95% confidence interval, 4.9-260.0), respectively, at 36 weeks ultrasound. The pooled sensitivity, specificity, and diagnostic odds ratio in predicting fetal growth restriction were 71% (95% confidence interval, 52%-85%), 90% (95% confidence interval, 79%-95%), and 25.8 (95% confidence interval, 14.5-45.8), respectively, at 32 weeks ultrasound and 48% (95% confidence interval, 41%-55%), 94% (95% confidence interval, 93%-96%), and 16.9 (95% confidence interval, 10.8-26.6), respectively, at 36 weeks ultrasound. Abdominal circumference of <10th percentile seemed to have comparable sensitivity to estimated fetal weight of <10th percentile in predicting small-for-gestational-age neonates. CONCLUSION: An ultrasound assessment of the fetal biometry at 36 weeks of gestation seemed to have better predictive accuracy for small-for-gestational-age neonates than an ultrasound assessment at 32 weeks of gestation. However, an opposite trend was noted when the outcome was fetal growth restriction. Fetal abdominal circumference had a similar predictive accuracy to that of estimated fetal weight in detecting small-for-gestational-age neonates.