Individualized growth assessment in pregnancies complicated by fetal gastroschisis

Abstract

Objective Prenatal ultrasound (US) has been shown to overestimate the incidence of suspected fetal growth restriction (FGR) in gastroschisis cases. This is largely because of altered sonographic abdominal circumference (AC) measurements when comparing gastroschisis cases with population nomograms. Individualized Growth Assessment (IGA) evaluates fetal growth using serial US measurements that allow consideration of the growth potential for a given case. Our goal was to assess the utility of IGA for distinguishing normal and pathological fetal growth in gastroschisis cases. Study design Pregnancies with prenatally diagnosed fetal gastroschisis were managed and delivered at a single academic medical center. US fetal biometry including head circumference (HC), abdominal circumference (AC), and femur diaphysis length (FDL), and neonatal measurements including birthweight and HC were collected and analyzed for 32 consecutive fetal gastroschisis cases with at least two 2nd and two 3rd trimester measurements. Second trimester growth velocities were compared to a group of 118 non-anomalous fetuses with normal neonatal growth outcomes. Gastroschisis cases were classified into groups based on fetal growth pathology score (FGPS9) patterns. Agreement between IGA (FGPS9) and serial conventional estimated fetal weight (EFW) measurements for determining growth pathology was evaluated. Neonatal size outcomes were compared between conventional birthweight classifications for determining small for gestational age (SGA) and IGA Growth Potential Realization Index (GPRI) for weight and head circumference measurements. Results Fetal growth pathology score (FGPS9) measurements identified three in-utero growth patterns: no growth pathology, growth restriction and recovery, and progressive growth restriction. In the no growth pathology group (n = 19), there was 84% agreement between IGA and conventional methods in determining pathological growth in both the 3rd trimester and at birth. In the growth restriction and recovery group (n = 7), there was 71% agreement both in the 3rd trimester and at birth between IGA and conventional methods. In the progressive growth restriction group (n = 5), there was 100% agreement in the 3rd trimester and 60% agreement at birth between IGA and conventional methods. Conclusion We present the first study using IGA to evaluate normal and pathological fetal growth in prenatally diagnosed gastroschisis cases. IGA was able to delineate two 3rd trimester growth pathology patterns – one with persistent growth restriction and another with in-utero growth recovery. Further validation of these initial findings with larger cohorts is warranted.