Normal Fetal Growth Profile at 10–41 Weeks of Gestation – An Update Based on 10225 Normal Singleton Pregnancies and Measurement of the Fetal Parameters Using 3D Ultrasound

Abstract

Objective To construct new growth charts and tables for the following fetal growth parameters: biparietal diameter (BPD), occipitofrontal diameter (OFD), head circumference (HC), abdominal transverse diameter (ATD), abdominal sagittal diameter (ASD), abdominal circumference (AC), femur length (Fe), tibia length (Ti), fibula length (Fi), humerus length (Hu), radius length (Ra), and ulna length (Ul).

Patients and Methods This prospective study was conducted at a level III ultrasound center as a population-based cross-sectional study on 10 225 normal singleton pregnancies with a gestational age between 10 and 41 completed weeks. Gestational age was confirmed in all cases by an ultrasound examination with crown-rump measurement before 10 weeks of gestation. All examinations were performed with 3 D probes. BPD, OFD, ATD, and ASD were measured as outer-to-outer measurements (skin-to-skin) after identifying the exact biometric planes by 3 D multiplanar display. HC was computed using the formula . For AC the approximate elliptical formula AC = (ATD+ASD)/2 × 3.142 was used. Measurements of the limb bones included the entire ossified shaft.

Results Based on a nonlinear regression model for the age-specific mean values, distribution-free reference ranges were calculated for the parameters BPD, OFD, HC, ATD, ASD, AC, Fe, Ti, Fi, Hu, Ra and Ul. The new reference ranges were compared with our reference ranges published in 1996 as well as with different reference charts published by other authors.

Conclusion 3 D ultrasound allows a controlled demonstration of all fetal planes required for exact biometric measurements. The fetal growth profile including the 12 biometric parameters gives a precise overview of normal or abnormal fetal growth.

Zusammenfassung

Ziel Konstruktion neuer Wachstumskurven und -tabellen für die fetalen Wachstumsparameter biparietaler Kopfdurchmesser (BPD), frontookzipitaler Kopfdurchmesser (FOD), Kopfumfang (KU), abdominaler Transversaldurchmesser (ATD), abdominaler Sagittaldurchmesser (ASD), Abdomenumfang (AU), Femurlänge (Fe), Tibialänge (Ti), Fibulalänge (Fi), Humeruslänge (Hu), Radiuslänge (Ra) und Ulnalänge (Ul).

Patienten und Methoden Diese prospektive Studie wurde in einem Level-III-Zentrum als populationsbasierte Querschnittsstudie an 10 225 normalen Einlingsschwangerschaften mit einem Schwangerschaftsalter zwischen 10 und 41 kompletten Schwangerschaftswochen (SSW) durchgeführt. Bei allen Schwangeren war das Gestationsalter mittels sonografischer Messung der Scheitel-Steiß-Länge vor 10 SSW gesichert worden. Alle Untersuchungen erfolgten mit 3D-Ultraschallsonden. BPD, FOD, ATD und ASD wurden in Form einer Außen-Außen-Messung (von Haut zu Haut) erfasst, nachdem die Biometrieebenen im 3D-Multiplanarmodus exakt identifiziert waren. Der KU wurde mit Hilfe der Formel , der Abdomenumfang mittels der adaptierten Ellipsenformel AU = (ATD+ASD)/2 × 3,142 berechnet. Bei den Extremitätenknochen wurde der gesamte ossifizierte Knochenschaft gemessen.

Ergebnisse Basierend auf einem nicht linearen Regressionsmodell für die gestationsbezogenen Mittelwerte wurden verteilungsfreie Referenzbänder für die Parameter BPD, FOD, KU, ATD, ASD, AU, Fe, Ti, Fi, Hu, Ra und Ul berechnet. Die neuen Normkurven wurden mit den Normkurven, die wir 1996 publiziert hatten, wie auch mit verschiedenen in der Literatur publizierten Normkurven anderer Autoren verglichen.

Zusammenfassung 3D-Ultraschall gestattet eine kontrollierte Darstellung aller fetalen Ebenen, die für exakte biometrische Messungen erforderlich sind. Das fetale Wachstumsprofil, bestehend aus den 12 Biometrieparametern, gibt einen präzisen Überblick über ein normales oder abnormales fetales Wachstum.

Key words

fetus - 3 D ultrasound - biometry

Publication History

Received: 11 February 2022

Accepted: 19 October 2022

Article published online:
01 January 2023

• References

• 1 Hadlock FP, Deter RL, Harrist RB. et al. Fetal biparietal diameter: rational choice of plane of section for sonographic measurement. Am J Roentgenol 1982; 138 (05) 871-874 DOI: 10.2214/ajr.138.5.871.
• 2 Altman DG, Chitty LS. New charts for ultrasound dating of pregnancy. Ultrasound Obstet Gynecol 1997; 10 (03) 174-191 DOI: 10.1046/j.1469-0705.1997.10030174.x.
• 3 Chitty LS, Altman DG, Henderson A. et al. Charts of fetal size: 2. Head measurements. Br J Obstet Gynaecol 1994; 101 (01) 35-43 DOI: 10.1111/j.1471-0528.1994.tb13007.x.
• 4 Hansmann M. Ultraschallbiometrie im II. und III. Trimester der Schwangerschaft. Gynäkologe 1976; 9: 133-155
• 5 Snijders RJ, Nicolaides KH. Fetal biometry at 14–40 weeks’ gestation. Ultrasound Obstet Gynecol 1994; 4 (01) 34-48 DOI: 10.1046/j.1469-0705.1994.04010034.x.
• 6 Papageorghiou AT, Ohuma EO, Altman DG. et al International Fetal and Newborn Growth Consortium for the 21st Century (INTERGROWTH-21st). International standards for fetal growth based on serial ultrasound measurements: the Fetal Growth Longitudinal Study of the INTERGROWTH-21st Project. Lancet 2014; 384: 869-879 DOI: 10.1016/S0140-6736(14)61490-2. . Erratum in: Lancet. 2014 Oct 4; 384 (9950): 1264. PMID: 25209488.
• 7 Salomon LJ, Duyme M, Crequat J. et al. French fetal biometry: reference equations and comparison with other charts. Ultrasound Obstet Gynecol 2006; 28 (02) 193-198 DOI: 10.1002/uog.2733.
• 8 Merz E, Wellek S. Normal fetal growth profile – a uniform model for calculating normal curves for current head and abdomen parameters and long limb bones. Ultraschall Med 1996; 17 (04) 153-162 DOI: 10.1055/s-2007-1003172.
• 9 Knitza J, Kurmanavicius J, Faschingbauer F. et al Comparison of Current Swiss Fetal Biometry Reference Charts with Reference Charts from 1999. Are Fetuses Getting Bigger?. Ultraschall Med 2020; 41 (04) 410-417 DOI: 10.1055/a-0591-3206. . Epub 2018 May 24
• 10 Buck Louis GM, Grewal J, Albert PS. et al. Racial/ethnic standards for fetal growth: the NICHD Fetal Growth Studies. Am J Obstet Gynecol 2015; 213 (04) 449.e1-449.e41 DOI: 10.1016/j.ajog.2015.08.032.
• 11 Aggarwal N, Sharma GL. Fetal ultrasound parameters: Reference values for a local perspective. Indian J Radiol Imaging 2020; 30 (02) 149-155 DOI: 10.4103/ijri.IJRI_287_19. . Epub 2020 Jul 13.
• 12 Zhang Y, Meng H, Jiang Y. et al Chinese Fetal Growth & Prenatal Screening Consortium. Chinese fetal biometry: reference equations and comparison with charts from other populations. J Matern Fetal Neonatal Med 2019; 32 (09) 1507-1515 DOI: 10.1080/14767058.2017.1410787. . Epub 2017 Dec 7
• 13 Altman DG, Chitty LS. Charts of fetal size: 1. Methodology. Br J Obstet Gynaecol 1994; 101 (01) 29-34 DOI: 10.1111/j.1471-0528.1994.tb13006.x.
• 14 Wellek S, Merz E. Age-related reference ranges for growth parameters. Methods Inf Med 1995; 34 (05) 523-528
• 15 Ioannou C, Talbot K, Ohuma E. et al Systematic review of methodology used in ultrasound studies aimed at creating charts of fetal size. BJOG 2012; 119 (12) 1425-1439 DOI: 10.1111/j.1471-0528.2012.03451.x. . Epub 2012 Aug 13
• 16 Merz E, Kurjak A. 1989–2019: 30 years of 3D ultrasound in obstetrics and gynecology. Donald School J Ultrasound Obstet Gynecol 2018; 12 (02) 94-98
• 17 Merz E, Kurjak S. (eds.) Current status of clinical use of 3D/4D ultrasound in obstetrics and gynecology. New Delhi – London – Panama: Jaypee Brothers Medical Publishers; 2019
• 18 Campbell S, Thoms A. Ultrasound measurement of the fetal head to abdomen circumference ratio in the assessment of growth retardation. Br J Obstet Gynaecol 1977; 84 (03) 165-174 DOI: 10.1111/j.1471-0528.1977.tb12550.x.
• 19 Campbell S, Wilkin D. Ultrasonic measurement of fetal abdomen circumference in the estimation of fetal weight. Br J Obstet Gynaecol 1975; 82 (09) 689-697 DOI: 10.1111/j.1471-0528.1975.tb00708.x.
• 20 Hansmann M. Bestimmung des Gestationsalters und -gewichts und die Bedeutung für das klinische Management. In: Huch A, Huch R, Duc G. et al. Klinisches Management des kleinen Frühgeborenen. Stuttgart: Thieme; 1982: 31
• 21 Merz E. Fetal biometry in the second and third trimesters. In: Merz E. (ed.): Ultrasound in Obstetrics and Gynecology. Vol. 1: Obstetrics. Stuttgart – New York: Thieme; 2005: 139-160
• 22 Royston P. Constructing time-specific reference range. Stat Med 1991; 10: 675-690
• 23 Altman DG. Construction of age-related reference centiles using absolute residuals. Stat Med 1993; 12: 917-924
• 24 Cole TJ. Fitting smoothed centile curves to reference data. J Roy Stat Soc A Sta 1988; 151: 385-418
• 25 Cole T, Green P. Smoothing reference centile curves: the LMS method and penalized likelihood. Stat Med 1992; 11: 1305-1319