Department of Obstetrics, University Medical Center, Utrecht, The Netherlands.
Department of Obstetrics and Gynecology, University of North Carolina, Chapel Hill, USA.
Int J Gynaecol Obstet. 2021 Feb;152(2):148-151. doi: 10.1002/ijgo.13500. Epub 2020 Dec 29.
Publication of the Intergrowth-21st and WHO growth charts raises the question of which growth data prenatal providers should use in clinical practice. Is it better to use a universal chart applied globally, or metrics based on local or regional growth patterns? And what about customized charts versus local charts? FIGO has reviewed the different growth charts and studies assessing their reproducibility and predictive values for small- and large-for-gestational age newborns and, where available, adverse fetal outcomes. It concludes that local or regional charts are likely to be best for identifying the 10th percentile of newborns at highest risk. However, international standards for growth may also be used when coupled with locally appropriate thresholds for risk interpretation.
《21 世纪胎儿生长标准和世界卫生组织生长标准》的发布引发了这样一个问题，即产前提供者在临床实践中应该使用哪些生长数据。使用全球通用的图表更好，还是使用基于本地或区域生长模式的指标更好？定制图表与本地图表相比如何？FIGO 已经审查了不同的生长图表和研究，评估了它们对小胎龄和大胎龄新生儿的可重复性和预测值，以及在可用的情况下对胎儿不良结局的预测值。它得出的结论是，本地或区域图表可能最适合识别风险最高的第 10 个百分位数的新生儿。然而，当与本地风险解释的适当阈值结合使用时，也可以使用国际生长标准。
