ﺑﺎﺯﮔﺸﺖ ﺑﻪ ﺻﻔﺤﻪ ﻗﺒﻠﯽ
خرید پکیج
تعداد آیتم قابل مشاهده باقیمانده : 3 مورد
نسخه الکترونیک
medimedia.ir

Methods for assessment of macrosomia

Methods for assessment of macrosomia
Method Sensitivity, percent Specificity, percent PPV, percent NPV, percent
Maternal estimate: parous women estimate of weight >4000 g[1] 56 94 77 86
Clinician's estimate of weight >4000 g[2,15] 10 to 43 99.0 to 99.8 28 to 53 -
Sonographic estimates for weight >4000 g unless otherwise specified [1-16]        
1. AC
for weight >4000 g 77 75 91 50
for weight >4500 g 89 94 93 89
2. Serial ACs 84 94 93 89
3. FL and AC 63 - 68 -
4. AC and BPD 65 90 - -
5. BPD and AC and FL
for weight >4000 g 71 92 55 96
for weight >4500 g 22 to 44 99 30 to 44 97 to 99
6. BPD and AC and FL adjusted by maternal characteristics 86 95 - -
7. Abdominal wall thickness >11 mm
70 96 Less than 50 -
PPV: positive predictive value; NPV: negative predictive value; AC: abdominal circumference; FL: femur length; BPD: biparietal diameter.
References:
  1. Chauhan SP, Sullivan CA, Lutton TC, et al. Parous patients' estimate of birth weight in postterm pregnancy. J Perinatol 1995; 15:192.
  2. Chauhan SP, Hendrix NW, Magann EF, et al. Limitations of clinical and sonographic estimates of birth weight: experience with 1034 parturients. Obstet Gynecol 1998; 91:72.
  3. Combs CA, Rosenn B, Miodovnik M, Siddiqi TA. Sonographic EFW and macrosomia: is there an optimum formula to predict diabetic fetal macrosomia? J Matern Fetal Med 2000; 9:55.
  4. Gilby JR, Williams MC, Spellacy WN. Fetal abdominal circumference measurements of 35 and 38 cm as predictors of macrosomia. A risk factor for shoulder dystocia. J Reprod Med 2000; 45:936.
  5. Al-Inany H, Alaa N, Momtaz M, Abdel Badii M. Intrapartum prediction of macrosomia: accuracy of abdominal circumference estimation. Gynecol Obstet Invest 2001; 51:116.
  6. Pinette MG, Pan Y, Pinette SG, et al. Estimation of fetal weight: mean value from multiple formulas. J Ultrasound Med 1999; 18:813.
  7. Benacerraf BE, Gelman R, Frigoletto FD. Sonographically estimated fetal weights: accuracy and limitation. Am J Obstet Gynecol 1988; 159:1118.
  8. Sokol RJ, Chik L, Dombrowski MP, Zador IE. Correctly identifying the macrosomic fetus: improving ultrasonography-based prediction. Am J Obstet Gynecol 2000; 182:1489.
  9. Hirata GI, Medearis AL, Horenstein J, et al. Ultrasonographic estimation of fetal weight in the clinically macrosomic fetus. Am J Obstet Gynecol 1990; 162:238.
  10. Owen P, Ogston S. Conditional centiles for the quantification of fetal growth. Ultrasound Obstet Gynecol 1998; 11:110.
  11. Shields LE, Huff RW, Jackson GM, et al. Fetal growth: a comparison of growth curves with mathematical modeling. J Ultrasound Med 1993; 12:271.
  12. Crane JP, Kopta MM, Welt SI, Sauvage JP. Abnormal fetal growth patterns. Ultrasonic diagnosis and management. Obstet Gynecol 1977; 50:205.
  13. Hedriana HL, Moore TR. A comparison of single versus multiple growth ultrasonographic examinations in predicting birth weight. Am J Obstet Gynecol 1994; 170:1600.
  14. Petrikovsky BM, Oleschuk C, Lesser M, et al. Prediction of fetal macrosomia using sonographically measured abdominal subcutaneous tissue thickness. J Clin Ultrasound 1997; 25:378.
  15. Gonen R, Spiegel D, Abend M. Is macrosomia predictable, and are shoulder dystocia and birth trauma preventable? Obstet Gynecol 1996; 88:526.
  16. Henrichs C, Magann EF, Brantley KL, et al. Detecting fetal macrosomia with abdominal circumference alone. J Reprod Med 2003; 48:339.
Graphic 61014 Version 5.0

آیا می خواهید مدیلیب را به صفحه اصلی خود اضافه کنید؟