title: Individualized fetal growth assessment: critical evaluation of key concepts in the specification of third trimester size trajectories.
abstract: OBJECTIVE
  To characterize second and third trimester fetal growth using Individualized Growth Assessment methods in a larger cohort of fetuses with normal neonatal growth outcomes.
  
  
  METHODS
  A prospective longitudinal study of 119 pregnancies was performed from 18 weeks, MA, to delivery. Measurements of several 1D and 3D fetal size parameters were obtained from 3D volume data sets at 3-4 week intervals. Regression analyses were used to determine Start Points (SP) and Rossavik model (P = c {t} (k + st)) coefficients c. k and s for each parameter in each fetus. Second trimester growth velocity reference ranges were determined and size model specification functions re-established, the latter used to generate individual size models. Actual measurements were compared to predicted third trimester size trajectories using Percent Deviations. New age-specific reference ranges for the Percent Deviations of each parameter were defined using 2-level statistical modeling.
  
  
  RESULTS
  Rossavik models fit the data for all parameters very well (R(2): 99%), with SP's and k values similar to those found in much smaller cohorts. The c* values were strongly related to the second trimester slope (R(2): 97%), as was predicted s* to estimated c* (R(2): 54--95%). Rossavik models predicted third trimester growth with systematic errors close to 0%; random errors (95% range) ranged between 5.7 and 10.9% and 20.0 and 24.3% for 1D and 3D parameters, respectively.
  
  
  CONCLUSIONS
  IGA procedures for evaluating second and third trimester growth are now established based on a larger cohort (4-6 fold larger). New, more rigorously defined, age-specific standards for the evaluation of third trimester size deviations are now available for nine anatomical parameters and a weight estimation procedure that incorporates a soft tissue parameter (fractional thigh volume). These results provide a means for more reliably assessing fetal growth on an individualized basis, thus minimizing the effect of biological differences in growth.
authors: Department of Obstetrics and Gynecology, Baylor College of Medicine , Houston, TX , USA .
authors: Russell L
authors: RL
authors: Deter
authors: Wesley
authors: W
authors: Lee
authors: Haleh
authors: H
authors: Sangi-Haghpeykar
authors: Adi L
authors: AL
authors: Tarca
authors: Lami
authors: L
authors: Yeo
authors: Roberto
authors: R
authors: Romero
mesh_terms: D000328:Adult; D049628:Body Size; D001837:Body Weights and Measures / Q000379:methods* / Q000592:standards; D005260:Female; D047109:Fetal Development; D005865:Gestational Age; D057238:Growth Charts; D006801:Humans; D021621:Imaging, Three-Dimensional; D007206:Individuality; D007231:Infant, Newborn; D008137:Longitudinal Studies; D011247:Pregnancy; D011263:Pregnancy Trimester, Third; D016216:Ultrasonography, Prenatal
references: Fetal Diagn Ther. 2004 Jan-Feb;19(1):58-67
references: 14646420
references: Am J Epidemiol. 2009 Dec 1;170(11):1388-95
references: 19889710
references: J Clin Ultrasound. 1989 Feb;17(2):89-93
references: 2492566
references: Obstet Gynecol. 1985 Jul;66(1):69-75
references: 3892390
references: Obstet Gynecol. 1991 Sep;78(3 Pt 1):379-84
references: 1876369
references: J Ultrasound Med. 2005 Jun;24(6):817-28
references: 15914686
references: Ultrasound Obstet Gynecol. 1995 Nov;6(5):307-12
references: 8590199
references: Obstet Gynecol. 1986 Aug;68(2):156-61
references: 3526216
references: Proc Nutr Soc. 2007 Aug;66(3):423-34
references: 17637095
references: AJR Am J Roentgenol. 1982 Aug;139(2):367-70
references: 6979895
references: Best Pract Res Clin Obstet Gynaecol. 2009 Dec;23(6):871-80
references: 19632899
references: Endocr Rev. 2006 Apr;27(2):141-69
references: 16434511
references: AJR Am J Roentgenol. 1982 Apr;138(4):649-53
references: 6978026
references: Arch Dis Child Fetal Neonatal Ed. 2006 Jan;91(1):F17-20
references: 16223756
references: Obstet Gynecol. 1987 Nov;70(5):801-6
references: 3658291
references: Ultrasound Obstet Gynecol. 2004 Dec;24(7):766-74
references: 15586365
references: Anat Embryol (Berl). 1975 Nov 6;148(1):1-23
references: 1202989
references: Ultrasound Obstet Gynecol. 1995 Dec;6(6):400-10
references: 8903915
references: Ultrasound Obstet Gynecol. 2010 Apr;35(4):390-4
references: 20069673
references: Horm Res. 2009;72(5):257-65
references: 19844111
references: J Nutr. 2003 May;133(5 Suppl 2):1741S-1746S
references: 12730493
references: J Clin Ultrasound. 1989 Jan;17(1):33-6
references: 2492547
references: Stat Med. 1995 Jul 15;14(13):1417-36
references: 7481181
references: N Engl J Med. 1998 Dec 17;339(25):1817-22
references: 9854117
references: Radiology. 1992 Feb;182(2):501-5
references: 1732970
references: Best Pract Res Clin Endocrinol Metab. 2002 Sep;16(3):433-47
references: 12464227
references: J Clin Ultrasound. 1987 Jun;15(5):299-305
references: 3149956
references: J Ultrasound Med. 1982 Apr;1(3):97-104
references: 6152941
references: J Clin Ultrasound. 1988 May;16(4):215-25
references: 3152508
references: Semin Perinatol. 2004 Feb;28(1):3-22
references: 15058898
references: Semin Perinatol. 2004 Feb;28(1):23-32
references: 15058899
references: J Clin Ultrasound. 1987 Jan;15(1):23-30
references: 3106419
references: Ultrasound Obstet Gynecol. 2008 May;31(5):520-8
references: 18389488