A modified prenatal growth assessment score for the evaluation of fetal growth in the third trimester using single and composite biometric parameters

Abstract

Objective: To define modified Prenatal Growth Assessment Scores (mPGAS) for single and composite biometric parameters and determine their reference ranges in normal fetuses.

Methods: Nine anatomical parameters (ap) were measured and the weight estimated (EWT_a, EWT_b) in a longitudinal study of 119 fetuses with normal neonatal growth outcomes. Expected third trimester size trajectories, obtained from second trimester Rossavik size models, were used in calculating Percent Deviations (% Dev's) and their age-specific reference ranges in each fetus. The components of individual % Dev's values outside their reference ranges, designated +iapPGAS, -iapPGAS, were averaged to give +apPGAS and −apPGAS values for the 3rd trimester. The +iapPGAS and −iapPGAS values for different combinations of ap (c1a (HC, AC, FDL, ThC, EWT_a), c1b (HC, AC, FDL, ThC, EWT_b), c2 (ThC, ArmC, AVol, TVol), c3 (HC, AC, FDL, EWT_a)) were then averaged to give +icPGAS and −icPGAS values at different time points or at the end of the third trimester (+cPGAS, −cPGAS). Values for iapPGAS, ic1bPGAS, and ic2PGAS were compared to their respective apPGAS or cPGAS reference ranges.

Results: All mPGAS values had one 95% range boundary at 0.0%. Upper boundaries of 1D +apPGAS values ranged from 0.0% (HC) to +0.49% (ThC) and were +0.06%, +2.3% and +1.8% for EWT, AVol and TVol, respectively. Comparable values for −apPGAS were 0.0% (BPD, FDL, HDL), to −0.58% (ArmC), −0.13% (EWT), −0.8% (AVol), and 0.0% (TVol). The +cPGAS, 95% reference range upper boundaries varied from +0.36% (c1b) to +0.89% (c2). Comparable values for −cPGAS lower boundaries were −0.17% (c1b) to −0.43% (c2).

Conclusions: The original PGAS concept has now been extended to individual biometric parameters and their combinations. With the standards provided, mPGAS values can now be tested to see if detection of different types of third trimester growth problems is improved.

• Individualized growth assessment
• pregnancy
• Rossavik models
• size standards

Acknowledgements

The Authors wish to acknowledge the technical assistance of Melissa Powell, RDMS and Beverley McNie, BS, CCRP.

Declaration of interest

This research was supported (in part) by the Perinatology Research Branch, Division of Intramural Research, Eunice Kennedy Shriver National Institute of Child Health and Human Development, NIH, DHHS.