Fetal growth velocity and body proportion in the assessment of growth.

Abstract

Fetal growth restriction implies failure of a fetus to meet its growth potential and is associated with increased perinatal mortality and morbidity. Therefore, antenatal detection of fetal growth restriction is of major importance in an attempt to deliver improved clinical outcomes. The most commonly used approach towards screening for fetal growth restriction is by means of sonographic fetal weight estimation, to detect fetuses small for gestational age, defined by an estimated fetal weight <10th percentile for gestational age. However, the predictive accuracy of this approach is limited both by suboptimal detection rate (as it may overlook non-small-for-gestational-age growth-restricted fetuses) and by a high false-positive rate (as most small-for-gestational-age fetuses are not growth restricted). Here, we review 2 strategies that may improve the diagnostic accuracy of sonographic fetal biometry for fetal growth restriction. The first strategy involves serial ultrasound evaluations of fetal biometry. The information obtained through these serial assessments can be interpreted using several different approaches including fetal growth velocity, conditional percentiles, projection-based methods, and individualized growth assessment that can be viewed as mathematical techniques to quantify any decrease in estimated fetal weight percentile, a phenomenon that many care providers assess and monitor routinely in a qualitative manner. This strategy appears promising in high-risk pregnancies where it seems to improve the detection of growth-restricted fetuses at increased risk of adverse perinatal outcomes and, at the same time, decrease the risk of falsely diagnosing healthy constitutionally small-for-gestational-age fetuses as growth restricted. Further studies are needed to determine the utility of this strategy in low-risk pregnancies as well as to optimize its performance by determining the optimal timing and interval between exams. The second strategy refers to the use of fetal body proportions to classify fetuses as either symmetric or asymmetric using 1 of several ratios; these include the head circumference to abdominal circumference ratio, transverse cerebellar diameter to abdominal circumference ratio, and femur length to abdominal circumference ratio. Although these ratios are associated with small for gestational age at birth and with adverse perinatal outcomes, their predictive accuracy is too low for clinical practice. Furthermore, these associations become questionable when other, potentially more specific measures such as umbilical artery Doppler are being used. Furthermore, these ratios are of limited use in determining the etiology underlying fetal smallness. It is possible that the use of the 2 gestational-age-independent ratios (transverse cerebellar diameter to abdominal circumference and femur length to abdominal circumference) may have a role in the detection of mild-moderate fetal growth restriction in pregnancies without adequate dating. In addition, despite their limited predictive accuracy, these ratios may become abnormal early in the course of fetal growth restriction and may therefore identify pregnancies that may benefit from closer monitoring of fetal growth.