Nesbitt-Hawes Erin M, Tetstall Emma, Gee Kiera, Welsh Alec W
Division of Women's and Children's HealthUniversity of New South WalesRandwickNew South WalesAustralia; Department of Obstetrics and GynaecologyRoyal Hospital for WomenRandwickNew South WalesAustralia; Australian Centre for Perinatal ScienceUniversity of New South WalesRandwickNew South WalesAustralia.
Division of Women's and Children's HealthUniversity of New South WalesRandwickNew South WalesAustralia; Department of Obstetrics and GynaecologyRoyal Hospital for WomenRandwickNew South WalesAustralia.
Australas J Ultrasound Med. 2014 Feb;17(1):38-44. doi: 10.1002/j.2205-0140.2014.tb00083.x. Epub 2015 Dec 31.
: Fetal abdominal circumference (AC) is utilised in calculations for the estimation of fetal weight (EFW) and has been proposed as a method of monitoring diabetic pregnancies. We evaluated true ultrasound accuracy by comparing fetal AC biometry with neonatal anthropometry and compared this with standard ultrasound estimations of fetal weight. : A prospective observational study was performed at a tertiary referral centre. Women who were having their confinement of a term, singleton gestation either by induction of labour or elective caesarean section from 2009-2011 were approached to participate. An ultrasound was performed within 24 hours of delivery measuring the biometric parameters of AC, head circumference (HC), biparietal diameter and femur length. Following delivery the AC, HC and birthweight were measured on the neonate. : Fifty-two patients were enrolled in the study with data collected from 50. Mean AC measurement was 35.1 ± 2.1 cm and birth weight was 3596 ± 517 g. A Bland-Altman plot was used to compare the two AC measurements with the 95% limits of agreement ranging from -2.33-4.69 cm around a mean difference of 1.2 cm. Mean percentage error was 5.0% and 6.2% for the AC and HC measurements respectively, in comparison with percentage errors of 7.0-13.8% for estimation of fetal weight (EFW) from 27 formulae. : Sonographic AC measurement is accurate in term pregnancies, with a percentage error less than HC or EFW. Perceptions of ultrasound inaccuracy may relate to the application of formulae rather than the ultrasound technique itself. Fetal surveillance using serial AC measurement has been proposed, in particular monitoring of diabetic pregnancies and in such a group AC may be easier and faster to obtain and more meaningful than EFW.
胎儿腹围(AC)用于计算胎儿体重估计值(EFW),并已被提议作为监测糖尿病妊娠的一种方法。我们通过比较胎儿AC生物测量值与新生儿人体测量值来评估超声的真实准确性,并将其与胎儿体重的标准超声估计值进行比较。
在一家三级转诊中心进行了一项前瞻性观察研究。研究对象为2009年至2011年期间因引产或择期剖宫产分娩足月单胎妊娠的妇女。在分娩后24小时内进行超声检查,测量AC、头围(HC)、双顶径和股骨长度的生物测量参数。分娩后测量新生儿的AC、HC和出生体重。
该研究共纳入52例患者,收集到50例患者的数据。平均AC测量值为35.1±2.1cm,出生体重为3596±517g。使用Bland-Altman图比较两次AC测量值,95%一致性界限在平均差值1.