A pragmatic comparison of fetal biometry curves

被引:0
|
作者
Dhombres, Ferdinand [1 ,2 ,4 ]
Massoud, Mona [3 ]
机构
[1] Sorbonne Univ, Hop Trousseau, AP HP, Serv Med Foetale,GRC26, Paris, France
[2] Inserm, LIMICS, Paris, France
[3] Univ Claude Bernard Lyon 1, Ctr Hosp Lyon Sud, Serv Obstet & Med Foetale, Hosp Civils Lyon, Lyon, France
[4] Hop Armand Trousseau, Serv Med Foetale, 26 Ave Dr Arnold Netter, F-75020 Paris, France
来源
关键词
Biometry; Ultrasonography; Prenatal; Growth Charts; SHORT FEMUR; GROWTH; CHARTS; ASSOCIATION; ULTRASOUND; SIZE; STANDARDS; FRANCE; LENGTH; HEAD;
D O I
10.1016/j.gofs.2023.09.003
中图分类号
R71 [妇产科学];
学科分类号
100211 ;
摘要
Introduction. - The fetal biometrics charts recommended in France for ultrasound screening include measurements of head circumference (HC), biparietal diameter (BIP), abdominal circumference (AC) and femur length (FL). New international growth standards have been recommended since 2022. The aim of this work is to quantitatively describe the differences between these biometric curves.Methods. - The biometry curves from the French College for Fetal Ultrasound, OMS and INTERGROWTH21 are pragmatically compared based on their original quantile regression equations (superposition and quantification of differences in millimeters and in proportion) for different percentiles of clinical interest.Results. - Compared with the new charts, CFEF underestimates HC <-3DS and AC < 10eP. The proportions of differences between the CFEF and INTERGROWTH-21 or WHO curves always remained <5%. The proportions of difference of the 3rd percentile of HC and FL, 10th and 90th percentile of AC were always lower than 2%, 2%, 5% and 4% respectively, between OMS and INTERGROWTH-21.Conclusion. - The switch to prescriptive standards suggests an improvement in the detection of fetuses with AC < 10th percentile, an improvement in the detection of prenatal onset microcephaly, with no argument for a decrease in the detection rate of severe constitutional bone disease or modification of obstetrical guidelines.@ 2023 Published by Elsevier Masson SAS.
引用
收藏
页码:524 / 530
页数:7
相关论文
共 50 条
  • [1] Fetal biometry: A comparison of family physicians and radiologists
    Keith, R
    Frisch, L
    FAMILY MEDICINE, 2001, 33 (02) : 111 - 114
  • [2] Reference curves for fetal biometry in the Greek population: A study of 8500 fetuses
    Sotiriadis, A.
    Eleftheriades, M.
    Psarra, A.
    Sevastopoulou, E.
    Hassiakos, D.
    EUROPEAN JOURNAL OF CLINICAL INVESTIGATION, 2011, 41 : 66 - 66
  • [3] French fetal biometry: reference equations and comparison with other charts
    Salomon, L. J.
    Duyme, M.
    Crequat, J.
    Brodaty, G.
    Talmant, C.
    Fries, N.
    Althuser, M.
    ULTRASOUND IN OBSTETRICS & GYNECOLOGY, 2006, 28 (02) : 193 - 198
  • [4] Fetal biometry: a comparison between experienced sonographers and automated measurements
    Zalud, Ivica
    Good, Sara
    Carneiro, Gustavo
    Georgescu, Bogdan
    Aoki, Kathleen
    Green, Lorry
    Shahrestani, Farzaneh
    Okumura, Russell
    JOURNAL OF MATERNAL-FETAL & NEONATAL MEDICINE, 2009, 22 (01): : 43 - 50
  • [5] FETAL LIMB BIOMETRY
    JEANTY, P
    RADIOLOGY, 1983, 147 (02) : 601 - 602
  • [6] Reference values of fetal ultrasound biometry in Lithuania and their comparison with international charts
    Zaliunas, Bronius
    Jakaite, Vaidile
    Bartkeviciene, Daiva
    Ramasauskaite, Diana
    EUROPEAN JOURNAL OF OBSTETRICS & GYNECOLOGY AND REPRODUCTIVE BIOLOGY, 2024, 293 : 224 - 225
  • [7] Fetal Biometry Studies of Malaysian Pregnant Women and Comparison with International Charts
    Adam, N.
    Ramli, R. M.
    Jaafar, M. S.
    PROGRESS OF PHYSICS RESEARCH IN MALAYSIA, PERFIK2009, 2010, 1250 : 393 - 396
  • [8] Fetal biometry: It is time for change
    Haddad, G.
    GYNECOLOGIE OBSTETRIQUE FERTILITE & SENOLOGIE, 2017, 45 (10): : 517 - 518
  • [9] COMPARISON OF EARLY FETAL GROWTH-CURVES
    DUFF, GB
    AUSTRALIAN & NEW ZEALAND JOURNAL OF OBSTETRICS & GYNAECOLOGY, 1979, 19 (02): : 80 - 82
  • [10] SONOGRAPHIC BIOMETRY OF FETAL ORGANS
    WILHELM, C
    PROMPELER, H
    RAFLE, P
    SCHILLINGER, H
    ZEITSCHRIFT FUR GEBURTSHILFE UND PERINATOLOGIE, 1991, 195 (03): : 123 - 130