Correlation of sonographically measured fetal abdominal wall thickness with birth weight in diabetes

IF 2.1 4区 医学 Q2 OBSTETRICS & GYNECOLOGY European journal of obstetrics, gynecology, and reproductive biology Pub Date : 2024-10-04 DOI:10.1016/j.ejogrb.2024.10.003
M. Rauh , M. Voigt , M. Kappelmeyer , B. Schmidt , A. Köninger
{"title":"Correlation of sonographically measured fetal abdominal wall thickness with birth weight in diabetes","authors":"M. Rauh ,&nbsp;M. Voigt ,&nbsp;M. Kappelmeyer ,&nbsp;B. Schmidt ,&nbsp;A. Köninger","doi":"10.1016/j.ejogrb.2024.10.003","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<div><h3>Objective</h3><div>To determine the association between sonographically measured abdominal wall thickness (AWT) and birth weight of fetuses of pregnant women with diabetes.</div></div><div><h3>Methods</h3><div>This retrospective study included 185 pregnant women who presented to a level I perinatal centre between January 2021 and December 2022. All mothers had diabetes, and were divided into the following subgroups: diet-controlled gestational diabetes mellitus; insulin-dependent gestational diabetes mellitus; type 1 diabetes mellitus; and type 2 diabetes mellitus. At the time of admission, gestational age varied between 29 + 2 and 41 + 2 weeks (+days) of gestation. Weight estimation was performed routinely using the Hadlock I formula. Fetal AWT was determined retrospectively at the same axial level as used for the measurement of abdominal circumference. Only women with a sonographic fetal weight estimation within 5 days before delivery were included.</div></div><div><h3>Results</h3><div>For the whole cohort, a moderate positive correlation was found between fetal AWT and estimated fetal weight (<em>r</em> = 0.411, <em>p</em> &lt; 0.001), a moderate correlation was found between fetal AWT and birth weight (<em>r</em> = 0.493, <em>p</em> &lt; 0.001), a weak correlation was found between fetal AWT and body length (<em>r</em> = 0.365, <em>p</em> &lt; 0.001), and a weak correlation was found between fetal AWT and body length percentile (<em>r</em> = 0.276, <em>p</em> &lt; 0.001). No strong differences in parameters were found between the diabetes subgroups. Receiver operating characteristic (ROC) curve analysis was performed to identify newborns with birth weight &gt; 4000 g (macrosomia) and birth weight &gt; 90th percentile according to Voigt in the group with gestational age &gt; 37 weeks. ROC curve analysis was performed to identify newborns with birth weight &gt; 90th percentile in the whole cohort. AWT and sonographically estimated fetal weight were included in the calculation. The combination of AWT and estimated fetal weight only led to a marginal improvement compared with estimated fetal weight alone for predicting newborns with birth weight &gt; 4000 g in the group with gestational age &gt; 37 weeks [area under the curve (AUC) 0.857 vs 0.871], and for predicting newborns with birth weight &gt; 90th percentile in the group with gestational age &gt; 37 weeks (AUC 0.840 vs 0.846) and in the whole cohort (AUC 0.816 vs 0.826).</div></div><div><h3>Conclusion</h3><div>A sonographically measured AWT of 7.1 mm in fetuses of diabetic mothers is predictive of birth weight &gt; 90th percentile with sensitivity of 61 %, specificity of 85 %, and AUC of 0.748. ROC curve analysis showed that estimated fetal weight determined by ultrasound (using Hadlock formula I) seems to be slightly superior for the identification of macrosomic fetuses with birth weight &gt; 90th percentile. A threshold value for estimated fetal weight of 3774 g had sensitivity of 70 %, specificity of 86 %, and AUC of 0.816. The combination of AWT and estimated fetal weight in a single formula only yielded a marginal improvement in accuracy compared with the use of estimated fetal weight alone.</div></div>","PeriodicalId":11975,"journal":{"name":"European journal of obstetrics, gynecology, and reproductive biology","volume":"303 ","pages":"Pages 9-14"},"PeriodicalIF":2.1000,"publicationDate":"2024-10-04","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"European journal of obstetrics, gynecology, and reproductive biology","FirstCategoryId":"3","ListUrlMain":"https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0301211524005414","RegionNum":4,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q2","JCRName":"OBSTETRICS & GYNECOLOGY","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

Objective

To determine the association between sonographically measured abdominal wall thickness (AWT) and birth weight of fetuses of pregnant women with diabetes.

Methods

This retrospective study included 185 pregnant women who presented to a level I perinatal centre between January 2021 and December 2022. All mothers had diabetes, and were divided into the following subgroups: diet-controlled gestational diabetes mellitus; insulin-dependent gestational diabetes mellitus; type 1 diabetes mellitus; and type 2 diabetes mellitus. At the time of admission, gestational age varied between 29 + 2 and 41 + 2 weeks (+days) of gestation. Weight estimation was performed routinely using the Hadlock I formula. Fetal AWT was determined retrospectively at the same axial level as used for the measurement of abdominal circumference. Only women with a sonographic fetal weight estimation within 5 days before delivery were included.

Results

For the whole cohort, a moderate positive correlation was found between fetal AWT and estimated fetal weight (r = 0.411, p < 0.001), a moderate correlation was found between fetal AWT and birth weight (r = 0.493, p < 0.001), a weak correlation was found between fetal AWT and body length (r = 0.365, p < 0.001), and a weak correlation was found between fetal AWT and body length percentile (r = 0.276, p < 0.001). No strong differences in parameters were found between the diabetes subgroups. Receiver operating characteristic (ROC) curve analysis was performed to identify newborns with birth weight > 4000 g (macrosomia) and birth weight > 90th percentile according to Voigt in the group with gestational age > 37 weeks. ROC curve analysis was performed to identify newborns with birth weight > 90th percentile in the whole cohort. AWT and sonographically estimated fetal weight were included in the calculation. The combination of AWT and estimated fetal weight only led to a marginal improvement compared with estimated fetal weight alone for predicting newborns with birth weight > 4000 g in the group with gestational age > 37 weeks [area under the curve (AUC) 0.857 vs 0.871], and for predicting newborns with birth weight > 90th percentile in the group with gestational age > 37 weeks (AUC 0.840 vs 0.846) and in the whole cohort (AUC 0.816 vs 0.826).

Conclusion

A sonographically measured AWT of 7.1 mm in fetuses of diabetic mothers is predictive of birth weight > 90th percentile with sensitivity of 61 %, specificity of 85 %, and AUC of 0.748. ROC curve analysis showed that estimated fetal weight determined by ultrasound (using Hadlock formula I) seems to be slightly superior for the identification of macrosomic fetuses with birth weight > 90th percentile. A threshold value for estimated fetal weight of 3774 g had sensitivity of 70 %, specificity of 86 %, and AUC of 0.816. The combination of AWT and estimated fetal weight in a single formula only yielded a marginal improvement in accuracy compared with the use of estimated fetal weight alone.
查看原文
分享 分享
微信好友 朋友圈 QQ好友 复制链接
本刊更多论文
超声波测量的糖尿病胎儿腹壁厚度与出生体重的相关性
方法 这项回顾性研究纳入了 2021 年 1 月至 2022 年 12 月期间在一级围产中心就诊的 185 名孕妇。所有母亲均患有糖尿病,并被分为以下亚组:饮食控制型妊娠糖尿病、胰岛素依赖型妊娠糖尿病、1 型糖尿病和 2 型糖尿病。入院时,胎龄介于妊娠 29+2 周和 41+2 周(+天)之间。体重估算采用哈德洛克 I 公式进行常规估算。胎儿AWT在测量腹围时使用的同一轴线水平上进行回顾性测定。结果 在整个队列中,胎儿AWT与估计胎儿体重呈中度正相关(r = 0.411,p < 0.001),胎儿AWT与出生体重呈中度相关(r = 0.493,p <0.001),胎儿AWT与身长呈弱相关(r = 0.365,p <0.001),胎儿AWT与身长百分位数呈弱相关(r = 0.276,p <0.001)。糖尿病亚组之间的参数差异不大。通过接收器操作特征(ROC)曲线分析,确定了胎龄 37 周组中出生体重达 4000 克(巨大儿)和出生体重达 Voigt 第 90 百分位数的新生儿。进行了 ROC 曲线分析,以确定整个队列中出生体重达 90 百分位数的新生儿。AWT和超声估测的胎儿体重均被纳入计算。在预测胎龄大于 37 周组中出生体重大于 4000 克的新生儿时,联合使用 AWT 和估测胎儿体重仅比单独使用估测胎儿体重略有提高[曲线下面积(AUC)为 0.857 vs 0.871]。结论在糖尿病母亲的胎儿中,声像图测量的 AWT 为 7.1 mm,可预测出生体重达 90 百分位数,灵敏度为 61%,特异度为 85%,AUC 为 0.748。ROC 曲线分析表明,通过超声波确定的估计胎儿体重(使用哈氏公式 I)在识别出生体重大于或等于 90 百分位数的巨大胎儿方面似乎略胜一筹。估计胎儿体重的临界值为 3774 克,灵敏度为 70%,特异度为 86%,AUC 为 0.816。与单独使用估计胎儿体重相比,将 AWT 和估计胎儿体重结合在一个公式中只能略微提高准确性。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 去求助
来源期刊
CiteScore
4.60
自引率
3.80%
发文量
898
审稿时长
8.3 weeks
期刊介绍: The European Journal of Obstetrics & Gynecology and Reproductive Biology is the leading general clinical journal covering the continent. It publishes peer reviewed original research articles, as well as a wide range of news, book reviews, biographical, historical and educational articles and a lively correspondence section. Fields covered include obstetrics, prenatal diagnosis, maternal-fetal medicine, perinatology, general gynecology, gynecologic oncology, uro-gynecology, reproductive medicine, infertility, reproductive endocrinology, sexual medicine and reproductive ethics. The European Journal of Obstetrics & Gynecology and Reproductive Biology provides a forum for scientific and clinical professional communication in obstetrics and gynecology throughout Europe and the world.
期刊最新文献
Inside Back Cover - Editors with images Corrigendum to “Prophylactic tranexamic acid during myomectomy: A systematic review and meta-analysis of randomized controlled trials” [Eur. J. Obstet. Gynecol. Reprod. Biol. 276 (2022) 82–91] Survival outcomes of endometrial cancer patients with disease involving the lower uterine segment: A meta-analysis Outcomes of first assisted reproductive technology treatment in infertile women with and without antinuclear antibodies: A prospective cohort study Maternal and neonatal outcomes of prolonged second stage of labor with delayed pushing: A study of French Perinatal practices before and after guideline changes
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
现在去查看 取消
×
提示
确定
0
微信
客服QQ
Book学术公众号 扫码关注我们
反馈
×
意见反馈
请填写您的意见或建议
请填写您的手机或邮箱
已复制链接
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
×
扫码分享
扫码分享
Book学术官方微信
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术
文献互助 智能选刊 最新文献 互助须知 联系我们:info@booksci.cn
Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。
Copyright © 2023 Book学术 All rights reserved.
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号 京ICP备2023020795号-1