Division of Intramural Population Health Research, Eunice Kennedy Shriver National Institute of Child Health and Human Development, Bethesda, MD.
Biostatistics Branch, Division of Cancer Epidemiology and Genetics, National Cancer Institute, Rockville, MD.
Am J Obstet Gynecol. 2020 Feb;222(2):174.e1-174.e10. doi: 10.1016/j.ajog.2019.08.027. Epub 2019 Aug 24.
Although intertwin size difference is an important measure of fetal growth, the appropriate cut point to define discordance is unclear. Few studies have assessed intertwin differences in estimated fetal weight longitudinally or in relation to size differences at birth.
The objectives of the study were to estimate the magnitude of percentage differences in estimated fetal weight across gestation in dichorionic twins in relation to a fixed discordance cut point and compare classification of aberrant fetal growth by different measures (estimated fetal weight differences, birthweight discordance, small for gestational age).
Women aged 18-45 years from 8 US centers with dichorionic twin pregnancies at 8 weeks 0 days to 13 weeks 6 days gestation planning to deliver in participating hospitals were recruited into the Eunice Kennedy Shriver National Institute of Child Health and Human Development Fetal Growth Studies-Dichorionic Twins study and followed through delivery (n = 140; 2012-2013). Ultrasounds were conducted at 6 targeted study visits to obtain fetal biometrics and calculate estimated fetal weight. Percent estimated fetal weight and birthweight differences were calculated: ([weight - weight]/weight)*100; discordance was defined as ≥18% for illustration. Birth sizes for gestational age (both, 1, or neither small for gestational age) were determined; twins were categorized into combined birthweight plus small for gestational age groups: birthweight discordance ≥18% (yes, no) with both, 1, or neither small for gestational age. Linear mixed-models estimated percentiles of estimated fetal weight percent differences across gestation and compared estimated fetal weight differences between combined birthweight discordance and small for gestational age groups. A Fisher exact test compared birthweight discordance and small for gestational age classifications.
Median estimated fetal weight percentage difference increased across gestation (5.9% at 15.0, 8.4% at 38.0 weeks), with greater disparities at higher percentiles (eg, 90th percentile: 15.6% at 15.0, 26.3% at 38.0 weeks). As gestation advanced, an increasing percentage of pregnancies were classified as discordant using a fixed cut point: 10% at 27.0, 15% at 34.0, and 20% at 38.0 weeks. Birthweight discordance and small for gestational age classifications differed (P = .002); for birthweight discordance ≥18% vs <18%: 44% vs 71% had neither small for gestational age; 56% vs 18% had 1 small for gestational age; no cases (0%) vs 11% had both small for gestational age, respectively. Estimated fetal weight percent difference varied across gestation by birthweight discordance plus small for gestational age classification (P = .040). Estimated fetal weight percentage difference increased with birthweight discordance ≥18% (neither small for gestational age: 0.46%/week [95% confidence interval, 0.08-0.84]; 1 small for gestational age: 0.57%/week [95% confidence interval, 0.25-0.90]) but less so without birthweight discordance (neither small for gestational age: 0.17%/week [95% confidence interval, 0.06-0.28]; 1 small for gestational age: 0.03%/week [95% confidence interval, -0.17 to 0.24]); both small for gestational age: 0.10%/week [95% confidence interval, -0.15 to 0.36]).
The percentage of dichorionic pregnancies exceeding a fixed discordance cut point increased over gestation. A fixed cut point for defining twin discordance would identify an increasing percentage of twins as discordant as gestation advances. Small for gestational age and percentage weight differences assess distinct aspects of dichorionic twin growth. A percentile cut point may be more clinically useful for defining discordance, although further study is required to assess whether any specific percentile cut point correlates to adverse outcomes.
尽管胎儿生长的重要衡量标准是双胎间的大小差异,但定义不一致的合适切点尚不清楚。很少有研究评估双胎妊娠中估计胎儿体重的纵向差异,也没有研究评估出生时大小差异与生长差异的关系。
本研究的目的是评估在 8 周 0 天至 13 周 6 天妊娠的双绒毛膜双胎妊娠中,相对于固定的不一致性切点,估计胎儿体重的百分比差异在整个妊娠期的幅度,并比较不同方法(估计胎儿体重差异、出生体重不一致、小于胎龄儿)评估异常胎儿生长的分类。
本研究纳入了来自美国 8 个中心的年龄在 18-45 岁之间的孕妇,这些孕妇在妊娠 8 周 0 天至 13 周 6 天期间进行了双绒毛膜双胎妊娠,计划在参与的医院分娩(n=140;2012-2013 年)。在 6 次有针对性的研究访问中进行了超声检查,以获得胎儿生物测量值并计算估计胎儿体重。计算了估计胎儿体重的百分比差异:([体重-体重]/体重)*100%;不一致性定义为≥18%,以举例说明。确定了出生时的胎龄大小(均小、1 个小、均不小);将双胞胎分为合并出生体重+小于胎龄儿组:出生体重不一致性≥18%(是、否),均小、1 个小或均不小。线性混合模型估计了估计胎儿体重百分比差异的百分位数,比较了合并出生体重不一致性和小于胎龄儿组之间的估计胎儿体重差异。采用 Fisher 精确检验比较了出生体重不一致性和小于胎龄儿的分类。
随着妊娠的进展,中位数的估计胎儿体重百分比差异逐渐增加(15.0 周时为 5.9%,38.0 周时为 8.4%),在较高的百分位数时差异更大(例如,90 百分位数:15.0 周时为 15.6%,38.0 周时为 26.3%)。随着妊娠的进展,越来越多的妊娠被归类为使用固定切点的不一致性:27.0 周时为 10%,34.0 周时为 15%,38.0 周时为 20%。出生体重不一致性和小于胎龄儿的分类不同(P=0.002);对于出生体重不一致性≥18%与<18%:44%与 71%均不小;56%与 18%有 1 个小;没有病例(0%)与 11%均小。估计胎儿体重百分比差异在不同妊娠时因出生体重不一致性+小于胎龄儿分类而有所不同(P=0.040)。随着出生体重不一致性≥18%,估计胎儿体重的百分比差异增加(均不小:0.46%/周[95%置信区间,0.08-0.84];1 个小:0.57%/周[95%置信区间,0.25-0.90]),但没有出生体重不一致性时差异较小(均不小:0.17%/周[95%置信区间,0.06-0.28];1 个小:0.03%/周[95%置信区间,-0.17 至 0.24]);均小:0.10%/周[95%置信区间,-0.15 至 0.36])。
随着妊娠的进展,超过固定不一致性切点的双绒毛膜双胎妊娠的比例增加。定义双胞胎不一致性的固定切点将随着妊娠的进展,将越来越多的双胞胎归类为不一致性。小于胎龄儿和体重差异百分比评估双绒毛膜双胎生长的不同方面。百分位数切点可能对定义不一致性更具临床意义,尽管需要进一步研究以评估任何特定的百分位数切点是否与不良结局相关。