Search

Objective: The use of twin-specific vs singleton growth charts in the assessment of twin pregnancy has been controversial. The aim of this study was to assess whether a diagnosis of small-for-gestational age (SGA) made using twin-specific estimated-fetal-weight (EFW) and birth-weight (BW) charts is associated more strongly with adverse neonatal outcomes in twin pregnancies, compared with when the diagnosis is made using singleton charts.Methods: This was a cohort study of twin pregnancies delivered at St George's Hospital, London, between January 2007 and May 2020. Twin pregnancies complicated by intrauterine death of one or both twins, fetal aneuploidy or major abnormality, twin-twin transfusion syndrome or twin anemia-polycythemia sequence and those delivered before 32 weeks' gestation, were excluded. SGA was defined as EFW or BW below the 10th centile, and was assessed using both twin-specific and singleton EFW and BW charts. The main study outcome was composite adverse neonatal outcome. Mixed-effects logistic regression analysis with random pregnancy-level intercepts was used to test the association between SGA classified using the different charts and adverse neonatal outcome.Results: A total of 1329 twin pregnancies were identified, of which 913 (1826 infants) were included in the analysis. Of these pregnancies, 723 (79.2%) were dichorionic and 190 (20.8%) were monochorionic. Using the singleton charts, 33.3% and 35.7% of pregnancies were classified as SGA based on EFW and BW, respectively. The corresponding values were 5.9% and 5.6% when using the twin-specific charts. Classification as SGA based on EFW using the twin charts was associated significantly with composite adverse neonatal outcome (odds ratio (OR), 4.78 (95% CI, 1.47-14.7); P = 0.007), as compared with classification as appropriate-for-gestational age (AGA). However, classification as SGA based on EFW using the singleton standard was not associated significantly with composite adverse neonatal outcome (OR, 1.36 (95% CI, 0.63-2.88); P = 0.424). Classification as SGA based on EFW using twin-specific standards provided a significantly better model fit than did using the singleton standard (likelihood ratio test, P < 0.001). When twin-specific charts were used, classification as SGA based on BW was associated significantly with a 9.3 times increased odds of composite adverse neonatal outcome (OR, 9.27 (95% CI, 2.86-30.0); P < 0.001). Neonates classified as SGA according to the singleton BW standard but not according to the twin-specific BW standards had a significantly lower rate of composite adverse neonatal outcome than did AGA twins (OR, 0.24 (95% CI, 0.07-0.66); P = 0.009).Conclusions: The singleton charts classified one-third of twins as SGA, both prenatally and postnatally. Infants classified as SGA according to the twin-specific charts, but not those classified as SGA according to the singleton charts, had a significantly increased risk of adverse neonatal outcome compared with infants classified as AGA. This study provides further evidence that twin-specific charts perform better than do singleton charts in the prediction of adverse neonatal outcome in twin pregnancies. The use of these charts may reduce misclassification of twins as SGA and improve identification of those that are truly growth restricted. © 2021 International Society of Ultrasound in Obstetrics and Gynecology. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Objectives: To construct chorionicity-specific birth-weight reference charts for dichorionic diamniotic (DCDA) and monochorionic diamniotic (MCDA) twin pregnancies, incorporating estimated-fetal-weight (EFW) data in order to adjust for the relationship between suboptimal growth and preterm delivery. An additional aim was to determine if the inclusion of complicated twin pregnancies impacts on the reference charts produced.Methods: The inclusion criteria for this retrospective cohort study were twin pregnancy of known DCDA or MCDA chorionicity, known pregnancy outcome, last ultrasound scan within 14 days before birth and delivery between 25 and 38 weeks' gestation (Analysis A). An analysis was also conducted excluding pregnancies with complications recorded (Analysis B). Previously published twin EFW reference ranges were used in the analysis. A joint statistical model for EFW and observed birth weight for each pregnancy was created in order to estimate population birth-weight reference ranges corresponding to the distribution expected if all pregnancies delivered at any given gestational age. It was not assumed that the median EFW was equal to birth weight for any given gestational age. The models were fitted using a Bayesian approach.Results: We retrieved data on 1664 twin pregnancies, of which 707 DCDA and 241 MCDA pregnancies met the inclusion criteria. In Analysis A, the estimated population median birth weight was similar to the median EFW at around 27 weeks' gestation but fell below the EFW values with increasing gestation, being 156 g lower in both DCDA and MCDA pregnancies at 35 weeks; this finding was confirmed by direct comparison of the last EFW and birth-weight values in each pregnancy. When the analysis was repeated after excluding complicated twin pregnancies (Analysis B), compared with Analysis A, there was very little difference in the median birth-weight results obtained across gestation. The largest absolute difference between Analyses A and B for DCDA twins was at 31, 32 and 33 weeks, with a 9-g lower median birth weight in Analysis A compared with Analysis B. The largest absolute difference for MCDA twins was greater than that for DCDA twins, with a 21-g lower median birth weight at 25 weeks in Analysis A compared with Analysis B.Conclusions: We have established population chorionicity-specific birth-weight reference charts for DCDA and MCDA twin pregnancies, corresponding to the range expected were all pregnancies to deliver at any given gestational age. In this population of twins, the median birth weight was consistently lower than that reported for singletons, and there was variation in the median birth weight at different gestational ages according to chorionicity. © 2021 The Authors. Ultrasound in Obstetrics & Gynecology published by John Wiley & Sons Ltd on behalf of International Society of Ultrasound in Obstetrics and Gynecology. - Legal Statement: This is an open access article under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial-NoDerivs License, which permits use and distribution in any medium, provided the original work is properly cited, the use is non-commercial and no modifications or adaptations are made. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]