• Pak J Med Sci · Nov 2020

    Risk evaluation of fetal growth restriction by combined screening in early and mid-pregnancy.

    • Bo Wang and Chunhua Zhang.
    • Bo Wang, Department of Gynecology, The Affiliated Huaian No.1 People's Hospital of Nanjing Medical University, Huaian 223300, Jiangsu Province, China.
    • Pak J Med Sci. 2020 Nov 1; 36 (7): 1708-1713.

    ObjectivesTo assess risk of fetal growth restriction (FGR) by combined screening in early and mid-pregnancy.MethodsPregnant women who received prenatal examinations and delivered in our hospital from January 2015 to January 2019 were selected and retrospectively analyzed. All women completed two ultrasonographic examinations during pregnancy, i.e. Down's screening during early pregnancy (11-13 + 6 weeks) and prenatal color Doppler screening during mid-pregnancy (20-24 weeks). A total of 33 FGR cases were screened out, and there were 1,507 normal pregnant women. The clinical, ultrasonographic and serological indices in early and mid-pregnancy were recorded. When the false positive rate was 5%, logistic regression analysis and receiver operating characteristic (ROC) curve were used to evaluate the influencing factors and predictive values of individual and combined indices for FGR in corresponding gestational weeks. The sensitivity and specificity of the optimal cutoff value of each index as well as the combination of optimal predictive indices were found by the area under ROC curve (AUC).ResultsWhen the false positive rate was 5% in the single-index screening during early pregnancy, the parity, BPD, AC, HC, and FL had statistical significances. Multivariate analysis showed that the parity and BPD had statistical significances. During mid-pregnancy, univariate analysis revealed that the parity, BMI, BPD, AC, HC, FL, UTA-PI, UTA-RI, UA-PI and UA-RI had statistical significances. BMI, AC, UTA-PI, UTA-RI, UA-PI and UA-RI had statistical significances in multivariate analysis. BMI, UTA-PI and UA-PI were risk factors for FGR, with UTA-PI being most dangerous. AUC for combined screening exceeded those for individual screenings. The best combined screening program was BPD in early pregnancy + BMI + AC + UTA-PI + UTA-RI + UA-PI + UA-RI in mid-pregnancy. The optimal cutoff value was 0.015, with the sensitivity of 83.1% and the specificity of 61.3%.ConclusionThe predictive efficiency of combined FGR screening in early and mid-pregnancy surpasses that of simple mid-pregnancy screening. It is recommended to use the integrated screening program in early and mid-pregnancy to predict FGR.Copyright: © Pakistan Journal of Medical Sciences.

      Pubmed     Copy Citation     Plaintext  

      Add institutional full text...

    Notes

     
    Knowledge, pearl, summary or comment to share?
    300 characters remaining
    help        
    You can also include formatting, links, images and footnotes in your notes
    • Simple formatting can be added to notes, such as *italics*, _underline_ or **bold**.
    • Superscript can be denoted by <sup>text</sup> and subscript <sub>text</sub>.
    • Numbered or bulleted lists can be created using either numbered lines 1. 2. 3., hyphens - or asterisks *.
    • Links can be included with: [my link to pubmed](http://pubmed.com)
    • Images can be included with: ![alt text](https://bestmedicaljournal.com/study_graph.jpg "Image Title Text")
    • For footnotes use [^1](This is a footnote.) inline.
    • Or use an inline reference [^1] to refer to a longer footnote elseweher in the document [^1]: This is a long footnote..

    hide…

What will the 'Medical Journal of You' look like?

Start your free 21 day trial now.

We guarantee your privacy. Your email address will not be shared.