Multivariable evaluation of term birth weight: a comparison between ultrasound biometry and symphysis-fundal height
Multivariable evaluation of term birth weight: a comparison between ultrasound biometry and symphysis-fundal height
复制标题
DOI：
10.3109/14767058.2013.858241
复制
发表时间：
2014-09-01
影响因子：
1.8
通讯作者：
Farina, Antonio
中科院分区：
文献类型：
--
作者：
Curti, Alessandra;Zanello, Margherita;Farina, Antonio
目的：建立出生体重预测方程，并与超声诊断进行比较。方法：在意大利博洛尼亚大学圣奥索拉-马尔皮吉医院进行了一项包括足月单胎妊娠的纵向观察队列研究。从一般线性模型(GLM)(回顾性研究)中推导出包括联合-底高(SFH)、体重指数(BMI)、母体腹围(Mac)和产次在内的出生体重预测公式。此外，在一组新的患者中，通过使用Hadlock公式同时使用GLM和超声来估计胎儿体重(前瞻性研究)。采用残差分析和组内相关系数(ICC)检验方法预测出生体重的准确性。结果：2012年1-11月，1034例患者进入回溯性研究，44例纳入前瞻性研究。公式如下：估计出生体重(G)1485.61+(sfh(Cm)x23.37)+(11.62(Cm)xmac)+[BMI x(-6.81)]+(胎次(0次未分娩，1次经产)x72.25)。在前瞻性应用时，GLM和超声波分别提供了73%和84%的实际重量+/-10%的预测百分比。超声估计值与新生儿体重显著相关(R-2=0.388，F=26.607，p值
Objective: To derive a birth weight predictive equation and to compare its diagnostic value with that of ultrasound.Methods: A longitudinal observational cohort study, including singleton pregnancies at term, was performed at St. Orsola-Malpighi Hospital, University of Bologna (Italy). A birth weight prediction formula, including symphysis-fundal height (SFH), BMI, maternal abdominal circumference (mAC) and parity was derived from a general linear model (GLM) (retrospective study). Moreover, on a new series of patients, the fetal weight was estimated by using both GLM and ultrasound using Hadlock formula (prospective study). The residual analysis and the intraclass correlation coefficient (ICC) were used to test the accuracy of methods in predicting birth weight.Results: Between January and November 2012, 1034 patients were included in the retrospective study and 44 in the prospective one. The following GLM was derived: estimated birth weight (g) 1485.61 + (SFH (cm) x 23.37) + (11.62 (cm) x mAC) + [BMI x (-6.81)] + (parity (0 nulliparous, 1 multiparous) x 72.25). When prospectively applied, the GLM and ultrasound provided a percentage of prediction within +/- 10% of the actual weight of 73% and 84%, respectively. Ultrasound estimation, as opposite of GLM one, was significantly associated with neonatal weight (R-2 = 0.388, F = 26.607, p value