1,331
Views
14
CrossRef citations to date
0
Altmetric
Original Article

Personalized third-trimester fetal growth evaluation: comparisons of individualized growth assessment, percentile line and conditional probability methods

, , , , , & show all
Pages 177-185 | Received 28 Sep 2014, Accepted 02 Dec 2014, Published online: 24 Dec 2014
 

Abstract

Objective: To compare third-trimester size trajectory prediction errors (average transformed percent deviations) for three individualized fetal growth assessment methods.

Methods: This study utilized longitudinal measurements of nine directly measured size parameters in 118 fetuses with normal neonatal growth outcomes. Expected value (EV) function coefficients and variance components were obtained using two-level random coefficient modeling. Growth models (IGA) or EV coefficients and variance components (PLM and CPM) were used to calculate predicted values at ∼400 third-trimester time points. Percent deviations (%Dev) calculated at these time points using all three methods were expressed as percentages of IGA MA-specific reference ranges [transformed percent deviations (T%Dev)]. Third-trimester T%Dev values were averaged (aT%Dev) for each parameter. Mean ± standard deviation’s for sets of aT%Dev values derived from each method (IGA, PLM and CPM) were calculated and compared.

Results: Mean aT%Dev values for nine parameters were: (i) IGA: −4.3 to 5.2% (9/9 not different from zero); (ii) PLM: −32.7 to 25.6% (4/9 not different from zero) and (iii) CPM: −20.4 to 17.4% (5/9 not different from zero). Seven of nine systematic deviations from zero were statistically significant when IGA values were compared to either PLM or CPM values. Variabilities were smaller for IGA when compared to those for PLM or CPM, with (i) 5/9 being statistically significant (IGA versus PLM), (ii) 2/9 being statistically significant (IGA versus CPM) and (iii) 5/9 being statistically significant (PLM versus CPM).

Conclusions: Significant differences in the agreement between predicted third-trimester size parameters and their measured values were found for the three methods tested. With most parameters, IGA gave smaller mean aT%Dev values and smaller variabilities. The CPM method was better than the PLM approach for most but not all parameters. These results suggest that third-trimester size trajectories are best characterized by IGA in fetuses with normal growth outcomes.

View correction statement:
Erratum

Acknowledgements

The authors wish to acknowledge the technical assistance of Melissa Powell, RDMS and Beverley McNie, BS, CCRP. We also wish to thank M. Balasubramaniam for providing the data given in the Appendix.

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. R. Romero contributed to this work as part of his official duties as an employee of the United States Federal Government. None of the other authors have disclosed a conflict of interest

Supplementary material available online

Supplementary File S1

Reprints and Corporate Permissions

Please note: Selecting permissions does not provide access to the full text of the article, please see our help page How do I view content?

To request a reprint or corporate permissions for this article, please click on the relevant link below:

Academic Permissions

Please note: Selecting permissions does not provide access to the full text of the article, please see our help page How do I view content?

Obtain permissions instantly via Rightslink by clicking on the button below:

If you are unable to obtain permissions via Rightslink, please complete and submit this Permissions form. For more information, please visit our Permissions help page.