intergrowth -21与世界卫生组织胎儿生长图在检测胎龄新生儿足月过短及预测短期不良围产期结局中的比较分析

IF 2.3 4区 医学 Q2 PEDIATRICS BMJ Paediatrics Open Pub Date : 2025-03-04 DOI:10.1136/bmjpo-2024-003230
Anum Rahim, Rozina Nuruddin, Iqbal Azam, Komal Abdul Rahim, Shiyam Sunder Tikmani, Nuruddin Mohammed
{"title":"intergrowth -21与世界卫生组织胎儿生长图在检测胎龄新生儿足月过短及预测短期不良围产期结局中的比较分析","authors":"Anum Rahim, Rozina Nuruddin, Iqbal Azam, Komal Abdul Rahim, Shiyam Sunder Tikmani, Nuruddin Mohammed","doi":"10.1136/bmjpo-2024-003230","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Objectives: </strong>To compare the INTERGROWTH-21st and the WHO fetal growth chart in detecting term small for gestational age (SGA) neonates and predicting short-term adverse perinatal outcomes.</p><p><strong>Design: </strong>A retrospective cohort study.</p><p><strong>Setting: </strong>Department of Obstetrics and Gynaecology at the Aga Khan University Hospital Karachi.</p><p><strong>Subjects: </strong>Term singleton pregnancies between July and December 2018 with ultrasound growth scan done within 4 weeks of delivery. Pregnancies with structural and chromosomal abnormalities and multiple gestations were excluded.</p><p><strong>Outcome: </strong>The estimated fetal weight (EFW) was calculated using the INTERGROWTH-21st and the WHO fetal growth chart based on ultrasound measurements. Fetuses with EFW below the 10th percentile were classified as SGA. Neonates were confirmed as SGA based on similar postnatal weight percentile. Short-term adverse perinatal outcomes were also analysed.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>A total of 932 records were screened, and 478 were included in the analysis. The sensitivity of the WHO fetal growth chart (70.2%; 95% CI: 60.4%, 78.8%) was higher than the INTERGROWTH-21st (45.2%; 95% CI: 35.4%, 55.3%) for predicting neonatal SGA. The WHO fetal growth chart predicted more SGA neonates when compared with the INTERGROWTH-21st (AUC=0.75, 95% CI: 0.71, 0.80 and AUC=0.63, 95% CI: 0.58, 0.68, respectively). Both charts were similar in predicting the short-term adverse perinatal outcomes; AUC (95% CI) was 0.77 (0.70, 0.83) for INTERGROWTH-21st and 0.78 (0.72, 0.85) for the WHO fetal growth chart.</p><p><strong>Conclusion: </strong>The WHO fetal growth chart demonstrates significantly better accuracy in predicting term SGA neonates compared with INTERGROWTH-21st. Further, both charts have similar prediction abilities for short-term adverse perinatal outcomes.</p>","PeriodicalId":9069,"journal":{"name":"BMJ Paediatrics Open","volume":"9 1","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":2.3000,"publicationDate":"2025-03-04","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC11881175/pdf/","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"A comparative analysis of INTERGROWTH-21st and the World Health Organisation fetal growth chart in detection of term small for gestational age newborns and prediction of short-term adverse perinatal outcomes.\",\"authors\":\"Anum Rahim, Rozina Nuruddin, Iqbal Azam, Komal Abdul Rahim, Shiyam Sunder Tikmani, Nuruddin Mohammed\",\"doi\":\"10.1136/bmjpo-2024-003230\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"<p><strong>Objectives: </strong>To compare the INTERGROWTH-21st and the WHO fetal growth chart in detecting term small for gestational age (SGA) neonates and predicting short-term adverse perinatal outcomes.</p><p><strong>Design: </strong>A retrospective cohort study.</p><p><strong>Setting: </strong>Department of Obstetrics and Gynaecology at the Aga Khan University Hospital Karachi.</p><p><strong>Subjects: </strong>Term singleton pregnancies between July and December 2018 with ultrasound growth scan done within 4 weeks of delivery. Pregnancies with structural and chromosomal abnormalities and multiple gestations were excluded.</p><p><strong>Outcome: </strong>The estimated fetal weight (EFW) was calculated using the INTERGROWTH-21st and the WHO fetal growth chart based on ultrasound measurements. Fetuses with EFW below the 10th percentile were classified as SGA. Neonates were confirmed as SGA based on similar postnatal weight percentile. Short-term adverse perinatal outcomes were also analysed.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>A total of 932 records were screened, and 478 were included in the analysis. The sensitivity of the WHO fetal growth chart (70.2%; 95% CI: 60.4%, 78.8%) was higher than the INTERGROWTH-21st (45.2%; 95% CI: 35.4%, 55.3%) for predicting neonatal SGA. The WHO fetal growth chart predicted more SGA neonates when compared with the INTERGROWTH-21st (AUC=0.75, 95% CI: 0.71, 0.80 and AUC=0.63, 95% CI: 0.58, 0.68, respectively). Both charts were similar in predicting the short-term adverse perinatal outcomes; AUC (95% CI) was 0.77 (0.70, 0.83) for INTERGROWTH-21st and 0.78 (0.72, 0.85) for the WHO fetal growth chart.</p><p><strong>Conclusion: </strong>The WHO fetal growth chart demonstrates significantly better accuracy in predicting term SGA neonates compared with INTERGROWTH-21st. Further, both charts have similar prediction abilities for short-term adverse perinatal outcomes.</p>\",\"PeriodicalId\":9069,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"BMJ Paediatrics Open\",\"volume\":\"9 1\",\"pages\":\"\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":2.3000,\"publicationDate\":\"2025-03-04\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC11881175/pdf/\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"BMJ Paediatrics Open\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"3\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.1136/bmjpo-2024-003230\",\"RegionNum\":4,\"RegionCategory\":\"医学\",\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"Q2\",\"JCRName\":\"PEDIATRICS\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"BMJ Paediatrics Open","FirstCategoryId":"3","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1136/bmjpo-2024-003230","RegionNum":4,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q2","JCRName":"PEDIATRICS","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

摘要

目的:比较intergrowth -21和WHO胎儿生长图在检测足月小于胎龄(SGA)新生儿和预测短期不良围产期结局方面的作用。设计:回顾性队列研究。地点:卡拉奇阿加汗大学医院妇产科。研究对象:2018年7月至12月期间的单胎妊娠,在分娩4周内进行超声生长扫描。排除有结构和染色体异常的妊娠以及多胎妊娠。结果:使用intergrowth -21和基于超声测量的WHO胎儿生长图计算估计胎儿体重(EFW)。EFW低于第10百分位的胎儿被归类为SGA。根据相似的出生后体重百分位数,确认新生儿为SGA。短期不良围产期结局也进行了分析。结果:共筛选932份病历,其中478份纳入分析。WHO胎儿生长图的敏感性为70.2%;95% CI: 60.4%, 78.8%)高于intergrowth -21 (45.2%;95% CI: 35.4%, 55.3%)预测新生儿SGA。与intergrowth -21相比,WHO胎儿生长图预测更多的SGA新生儿(AUC=0.75, 95% CI: 0.71, 0.80, AUC=0.63, 95% CI: 0.58, 0.68)。两种图表在预测短期围产期不良结局方面相似;intergrowth -21的AUC (95% CI)为0.77 (0.70,0.83),WHO胎儿生长图的AUC为0.78(0.72,0.85)。结论:与intergrowth -21相比,WHO胎儿生长图预测足月SGA新生儿的准确性显著提高。此外,两种图表对短期不良围产期结局的预测能力相似。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。

摘要图片

摘要图片

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
A comparative analysis of INTERGROWTH-21st and the World Health Organisation fetal growth chart in detection of term small for gestational age newborns and prediction of short-term adverse perinatal outcomes.

Objectives: To compare the INTERGROWTH-21st and the WHO fetal growth chart in detecting term small for gestational age (SGA) neonates and predicting short-term adverse perinatal outcomes.

Design: A retrospective cohort study.

Setting: Department of Obstetrics and Gynaecology at the Aga Khan University Hospital Karachi.

Subjects: Term singleton pregnancies between July and December 2018 with ultrasound growth scan done within 4 weeks of delivery. Pregnancies with structural and chromosomal abnormalities and multiple gestations were excluded.

Outcome: The estimated fetal weight (EFW) was calculated using the INTERGROWTH-21st and the WHO fetal growth chart based on ultrasound measurements. Fetuses with EFW below the 10th percentile were classified as SGA. Neonates were confirmed as SGA based on similar postnatal weight percentile. Short-term adverse perinatal outcomes were also analysed.

Results: A total of 932 records were screened, and 478 were included in the analysis. The sensitivity of the WHO fetal growth chart (70.2%; 95% CI: 60.4%, 78.8%) was higher than the INTERGROWTH-21st (45.2%; 95% CI: 35.4%, 55.3%) for predicting neonatal SGA. The WHO fetal growth chart predicted more SGA neonates when compared with the INTERGROWTH-21st (AUC=0.75, 95% CI: 0.71, 0.80 and AUC=0.63, 95% CI: 0.58, 0.68, respectively). Both charts were similar in predicting the short-term adverse perinatal outcomes; AUC (95% CI) was 0.77 (0.70, 0.83) for INTERGROWTH-21st and 0.78 (0.72, 0.85) for the WHO fetal growth chart.

Conclusion: The WHO fetal growth chart demonstrates significantly better accuracy in predicting term SGA neonates compared with INTERGROWTH-21st. Further, both charts have similar prediction abilities for short-term adverse perinatal outcomes.

求助全文
通过发布文献求助,成功后即可免费获取论文全文。 去求助
来源期刊
BMJ Paediatrics Open
BMJ Paediatrics Open Medicine-Pediatrics, Perinatology and Child Health
CiteScore
4.10
自引率
3.80%
发文量
124
期刊最新文献
Effect of probable neonatal sepsis on the development of infants in Eastern Uganda (ENON): a cohort study. Codesign and knowledge translation of the Strength-based, Tiered, Accessible Resources and Supports (STARS) for Kids study to identify and support child development, parental mentalwell-being and family psychosocial needs: a mixed-methods research protocol. Sensory processing differences and behavioural problems in children with autism: a retrospective study using statistical modelling and multi-output machine learning. Rheumatic heart disease in children and adolescents, part 1: epidemiology, pathogenesis and diagnosis. Comparative accuracy of sleep disturbance questionnaires in children with autism spectrum disorder: a receiver operating characteristic study.
×
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学术官方微信
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:604180095
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