• Freddy J Montero, Lynn L Simpson, Paula C Brady, and Russell S Miller.
• Department of Obstetrics and Gynecology, Columbia University Medical Center, New York, NY, USA. fjm2118@columbia.edu
• Am. J. Obstet. Gynecol. 2011 Sep 1; 205 (3): 284.e1-7.

ObjectiveThe objective of the study was to evaluate whether ratios considering omphalocele diameter relative to fetal biometric measurements perform better than giant omphalocele designation at predicting inability to achieve neonatal primary surgical closure.Study DesignCases of fetal omphalocele that underwent evaluation between May 2003 and July 2010 were identified. Inclusion was restricted to live births with plan for postnatal repair. Omphalocele diameter upon antenatal ultrasound was compared with abdominal circumference, femur length, and head circumference, yielding the respective omphalocele (O)/abdominal circumference (AC), O/femur length (FL), and O/head circumference (HC) ratios. The absolute measurements were used to classify giant lesions. Omphalocele ratios and giant omphalocele designations were evaluated as predictors of inability to achieve primary repair.ResultsAmong 25 included cases, staged or delayed closure occurred in 52%. With an optimal cutoff of 0.21 or greater, O/HC best predicted the primary outcome (sensitivity, 84.6%; specificity, 58.3%; odds ratio, 7.7). The O/HC of 0.21 or greater outperformed giant designations.ConclusionThe O/HC of 0.21 or greater best predicted staged or delayed omphalocele closure. Giant omphalocele designation, regardless of definition, poorly predicted outcome.Copyright © 2011 Mosby, Inc. All rights reserved.

16 keywords...

hide…