Back to Search Start Over

Associations of severe adverse perinatal outcomes among continuous birth weight percentiles on different birth weight charts

Authors :
Hester D. Kamphof
Sanne J. Gordijn
Wessel Ganzevoort
Viki Verfaille
Pien M. Offerhaus
Arie Franx
Eva Pajkrt
Ank de Jonge
Jens Henrichs
Obstetrics and gynaecology
Midwifery Science
APH - Personalized Medicine
APH - Quality of Care
Amsterdam Reproduction & Development (AR&D)
APH - Mental Health
Obstetrics and Gynaecology
ARD - Amsterdam Reproduction and Development
APH - Digital Health
Obstetrics & Gynecology
Source :
BMC Pregnancy and Childbirth, 22(1):375. BioMed Central, BMC Pregnancy and Childbirth, 22:375. BMC, BMC pregnancy and childbirth, 22(1):375. BioMed Central, Kamphof, H D, Gordijn, S J, Ganzevoort, W, Verfaille, V, Offerhaus, P M, Franx, A, Pajkrt, E, de Jonge, A & Henrichs, J 2022, ' Associations of severe adverse perinatal outcomes among continuous birth weight percentiles on different birth weight charts : a secondary analysis of a cluster randomized trial ', BMC Pregnancy and Childbirth, vol. 22, no. 1, 375 . https://doi.org/10.1186/s12884-022-04680-5, BMC Pregnancy and Childbirth, 22(1):375. BioMed Central Ltd.
Publication Year :
2022

Abstract

Objective To identify neonatal risk for severe adverse perinatal outcomes across birth weight centiles in two Dutch and one international birth weight chart. Background Growth restricted newborns have not reached their intrinsic growth potential in utero and are at risk of perinatal morbidity and mortality. There is no golden standard for the confirmation of the diagnosis of fetal growth restriction after birth. Estimated fetal weight and birth weight below the 10th percentile are generally used as proxy for growth restriction. The choice of birth weight chart influences the specific cut-off by which birth weight is defined as abnormal, thereby triggering clinical management. Ideally, this cut-off should discriminate appropriately between newborns at low and at high risk of severe adverse perinatal outcomes and consequently correctly inform clinical management. Methods This is a secondary analysis of the IUGR Risk Selection (IRIS) study. Newborns (n = 12 953) of women with a low-risk status at the start of pregnancy and that received primary antenatal care in the Netherlands were included. We examined the distribution of severe adverse perinatal outcomes across birth weight centiles for three birth weight charts (Visser, Hoftiezer and INTERGROWTH) by categorizing birth weight centile groups and comparing the prognostic performance for severe adverse perinatal outcomes. Severe adverse perinatal outcomes were defined as a composite of one or more of the following: perinatal death, Apgar score Results We found the highest rates of severe adverse perinatal outcomes among the smallest newborns (rd percentile) (6.2% for the Visser reference curve, 8.6% for the Hoftiezer chart and 12.0% for the INTERGROWTH chart). Discriminative abilities of the three birth weight charts across the entire range of birth weight centiles were poor with areas under the curve ranging from 0.57 to 0.61. Sensitivity rates of the various cut-offs were also low. Conclusions The clinical utility of all three charts in identifying high risk of severe adverse perinatal outcomes is poor. There is no single cut-off that discriminates clearly between newborns at low or high risk. Trial Registration Netherlands Trial Register NTR4367. Registration date March 20th, 2014.

Details

Language :
English
ISSN :
14712393
Volume :
22
Issue :
1
Database :
OpenAIRE
Journal :
BMC Pregnancy and Childbirth
Accession number :
edsair.doi.dedup.....f373f9a74177e73187a1a6c44513ead5
Full Text :
https://doi.org/10.1186/s12884-022-04680-5