title: Comparative efficiency of measures of early fetal growth restriction for predicting adverse perinatal outcomes.
abstract: OBJECTIVE
  To estimate the comparative efficiency of first-trimester fetal growth restriction, second-trimester fetal growth restriction, and first-to-second-trimester growth lag for predicting adverse perinatal outcomes.
  
  
  METHODS
  This is a retrospective cohort study of pregnancies with reliable dating based on last menstrual periods and first-trimester ultrasound examinations. Pregnancies with multiple fetuses, aneuploidy, and major structural anomalies were excluded. Fetal crown-rump lengths at 10-14 weeks, estimated fetal weights based on fetal biometry at 18-22 weeks, and interval growth were measured and converted to gestational age-adjusted Z-scores. The primary outcome was small for gestational age (SGA) at delivery. Secondary outcomes were low birth weight, preterm delivery, stillbirth, and preeclampsia. Receiver-operating characteristics curves were used to identify the optimal definitions of early fetal growth restriction associated with SGA and to compare screening efficiencies. Multivariable logistic regression was used to adjust for confounders.
  
  
  RESULTS
  Among 8,978 pregnancies meeting inclusion criteria, 551 (6.5%) neonates were SGA. Crown-rump length Z-score less than -1.0, estimated fetal weights Z-score less than -1.0, and growth Z-score less than -1.0 were identified as the optimal definitions of early fetal growth restriction associated with SGA (adjusted odds ratio 1.41 [95% confidence interval (CI) 1.13-1.74], 3.44 [95% CI 2.85-4.15] and 2.61 [95% CI 2.09-3.25], respectively). The sensitivity and specificity of first- and second-trimester fetal growth restriction for predicting SGA were 21.4% and 83.4%, and 37.2% and 85.5%, respectively. The area under the receiver-operating characteristics curve for second-trimester fetal growth restriction was greater than that for first-trimester fetal growth restriction and first-to-second-trimester growth lag (0.70 compared with 0.59 and 0.66, P<.001).
  
  
  CONCLUSIONS
  Second-trimester fetal growth restriction is superior to first-trimester fetal growth restriction and first-to-second-trimester growth lag for predicting SGA.
authors: From the Department of Obstetrics and Gynecology, Washington University School of Medicine, St. Louis, Missouri.
authors: Methodius G
authors: MG
authors: Tuuli
authors: Alison
authors: A
authors: Cahill
authors: David
authors: D
authors: Stamilio
authors: George
authors: G
authors: Macones
authors: Anthony O
authors: AO
authors: Odibo
references: McIntire DD, Bloom SL, Casey BM, Leveno KJ, Birth weight in relation to morbidity and mortality among newborn infants. N Engl J Med 1999;340:1234–8.
references: Barker DJ. Adult consequences of fetal growth restriction. Clin Obstet Gynecol 2006;49:270–83.
references: Gluckman PD, Hanson MA, Cooper C, Thornburg KL. Effect of in utero and early-life conditions on adult health and disease. N Engl J Med 2008;359:61–73.
references: Smith GC. First-trimester determination of complications of late pregnancy. JAMA 2010;303:561–2.
references: Smith GC, Smith MF, McNay MB, Fleming JE. First-trimester growth and the risk of low birth weight. N Engl J Med 1998;339:1817–22.
references: Pedersen NG, Figueras F, Wojdemann WR, Tabor A, Gardosi J. Early fetal size and growth as predictors of adverse outcome. Obstet Gynecol 2008;112:765–71.
references: Pedersen NG, Wojdemann KR, Scheike T, Tabor A. Fetal growth between the first and second trimesters and the risk of adverse pregnancy outcome. Ultrasound Obstet Gynecol 2008;32:147–54.
references: Rasmussen S, Kiserud T, Albrechtsen S. Foetal size and body proportion at 17–19 weeks of gestation and neonatal size, proportion, and outcome. Early Hum Dev 2006;82:683–90.
references: Mook-Kanamori DO, Steegers EA, Eilers PH, Raat H, Hofman A, Jaddoe VW. Risk factors and outcomes associated with first-trimester fetal growth restriction. JAMA 2010;303:527–34.
references: O'Brien GD, Queenan JT. Growth of the ultrasound fetal femur length during normal pregnancy. Part I. Am J Obstet Gynecol 1981;141:833–7.
references: Hadlock FP, Harrist RB, Sharman RS, Deter RL, Park SK. Estimation of fetal weight with the use of head, body, and femur measurements–a prospective study. Am J Obstet Gynecol 1985;151:333–7.
references: Robinson HP, Fleming JE. A critical evaluation of sonar “crown-rump length” measurements. Br J Obstet Gynaecol 1975;82:702–10.
references: Altman DG, Chitty LS. New charts for ultrasound dating of pregnancy. Ultrasound Obstet Gynecol 1997;10:174–91.
references: Kirkwood BR, Sterne JAC. Essential medical statistics. 2nd ed. Oxford: Blackwell; 2003. p. 470–471.
references: Alexander GR, Himes JH, Kaufman RB, Mor J, Kogan M. A United States national reference for fetal growth. Obstet Gynecol 1996;87:163–8.
references: Brown MA, Lindheimer MD, de Swiet M, Van Assche A, Moutquin JM. The classification and diagnosis of the hypertensive disorders of pregnancy: statement from the International Society for the Study of Hypertension in Pregnancy (ISSHP). Hypertens Pregnancy 2001;20:IX–XIV.
references: Hosmer DW, Lemeshow S. Applied logistic regression. 2nd ed. New York (NY): Wiley; 2000.
references: DeLong ER, DeLong DM, Clarke-Pearson DL. Comparing the areas under two or more correlated receiver operating characteristic curves: a nonparametric approach. Biometrics 1998;44:837–45.
references: Mongelli M, Gardosi J. Fetal growth. Curr Opin Obstet Gynecol 2000;12:111–5.
references: Leung TY, Chan LW, Leung TN, Fung TY, Sahota DS, Spencer K, et al. First-trimester combined screening for trisomy 21 in a predominantly Chinese population. Ultrasound Obstet Gynecol 2007;29:14–7.
references: Nakling J, Backe B. Adverse obstetric outcome in fetuses that are smaller than expected at second trimester routine ultrasound examination. Acta Obstet Gynecol Scand 2002;81:846–51.
references: Savitz DA, Terry JW Jr, Dole N, Thorp JM Jr, Siega-Riz AM, Herring AH. Comparison of pregnancy dating by last menstrual period, ultrasound scanning, and their combination. Am J Obstet Gynecol 2002;187:1660–6.
references: Bukowski R, Smith GC, Malone FD, Ball RH, Nyberg DA, Comstock CH, et al. Fetal growth in early pregnancy and risk of delivering low birth weight infant: prospective cohort study. BMJ 2007;334:836.
references: Tuuli MG, Dicke JM, Stamilio DM, Gray DL, Macones GA, Rampersad R, et al. Prevalence and likelihood ratios for aneuploidy in fetuses diagnosed prenatally with isolated congenital cardiac defects. Am J Obstet Gynecol 2009;201:390.e1–5.
references: Dicke JM, Blanco VM, Yan Y, Coplen DE. The type and frequency of fetal renal disorders and management of renal pelvis dilatation. J Ultrasound Med 2006;25:973–7.
references: Goetzinger KR, Stamilio DM, Dicke JM, Macones GA, Odibo AO. Evaluating the incidence and likelihood ratios for chromosomal abnormalities in fetuses with common central nervous system malformations. Am J Obstet Gynecol 2008;199:285.e1–6.