Clinical Research Unit, National Institute of Women, Children and Adolescents' Health Fernandes Figueira, Oswaldo Cruz Foundation, Rio de Janeiro, Brazil.
Graduate Program in Nutrition, Institute of Nutrition Josué de Castro, Federal University of Rio de Janeiro, Rio de Janeiro, Brazil.
J Matern Fetal Neonatal Med. 2023 Dec;36(2):2230510. doi: 10.1080/14767058.2023.2230510.
To systematically review and assess the risk of bias in the literature evaluating the performance of INTERGROWTH-21 estimated fetal weight (EFW) standards to predict maternal, fetal and neonatal adverse outcomes.
Searches were performed in seven electronic databases (Scopus, Web of Science, Medline, Embase, Lilacs, Scielo and Google Scholar) using citation tools and keywords (intergrowth AND (standard OR reference OR formula OR model OR curve); all from 2014 to the last search on April 16, 2021). We included full-text articles investigating the ability of INTERGROWTH-21 EFW standards to predict maternal, fetal or neonatal adverse outcomes in women with a singleton pregnancy who gave birth to infants with no congenital abnormalities. The study was registered on PROSPERO under the number CRD42020115462. Risk of bias was assessed with a customized instrument based on the CHARMS checklist and composed of 9 domains. Meta-analysis was performed using relative risk (RR [95%CI]) and summary ROC curves on outcomes reported by two or more methodologically homogeneous studies.
Sixteen studies evaluating fifteen different outcomes were selected. The risk of bias was high (>50% of studies with high risk) for two domains: blindness of assessment (81.3%) and calibration assessment (93.8%). Considering all the outcomes investigated, for 95% of the results, the specificity was above 73.0%, but the sensitivity was below 64.1%. Pooled results demonstrated a higher RR of neonatal small for gestational age (6.71 [5.51-8.17]), Apgar <7 at 5 min (2.17 [1.48-3.18]), and neonatal intensive care unit admission (2.22 [1.76-2.79]) for fetuses classified <10 percentile when compared to those classified above this limit. The limitation of the study is the absence of heterogeneity exploration or publication bias investigation, whereas no outcomes were evaluated by more than five studies.
The IG-21 EFW standard has low sensitivity and high specificity for adverse events of pregnancy. Classification <10th percentile identifies a high-risk group for developing maternal, fetal and neonatal adverse outcomes, especially neonatal small for gestational age, Apgar <7 at 5 min, and neonatal intensive care unit admission. Future studies should include blind assessment of outcomes, perform calibration analysis with continuous data, and evaluate alternative cutoff points.
系统评价和评估评估 INTERGROWTH-21 估计胎儿体重(EFW)标准预测母婴、胎儿和新生儿不良结局的文献偏倚风险。
在七个电子数据库(Scopus、Web of Science、Medline、Embase、Lilacs、Scielo 和 Google Scholar)中使用引文工具和关键字(intergrowth 和(标准或参考或公式或模型或曲线);全部来自 2014 年至 2021 年 4 月 16 日的最后一次搜索)进行搜索。我们纳入了全文文章,这些文章调查了 INTERGROWTH-21 EFW 标准在没有先天性异常的婴儿出生的单胎妊娠妇女中预测母婴、胎儿或新生儿不良结局的能力。该研究在 PROSPERO 上以 CRD42020115462 号注册。偏倚风险使用基于 CHARMS 清单的定制工具进行评估,该工具由 9 个领域组成。使用两个或更多方法学同质研究报告的相对风险(RR [95%CI])和总结 ROC 曲线进行荟萃分析。
选择了 16 项评估 15 种不同结局的研究。有两个领域的偏倚风险很高(>50%的研究为高风险):评估盲法(81.3%)和校准评估(93.8%)。考虑到所有调查的结局,对于 95%的结果,特异性高于 73.0%,但敏感性低于 64.1%。汇总结果表明,与分类>10 百分位的胎儿相比,分类<10 百分位的胎儿发生新生儿小于胎龄(6.71 [5.51-8.17])、5 分钟 Apgar<7(2.17 [1.48-3.18])和新生儿重症监护病房入院(2.22 [1.76-2.79])的 RR 更高。研究的局限性在于没有探索异质性或发表偏倚,并且没有一个结局由超过五个研究进行评估。
IG-21 EFW 标准对妊娠不良事件的敏感性低,特异性高。<10 百分位的分类可识别出发生母婴、胎儿和新生儿不良结局的高危人群,尤其是新生儿小于胎龄、5 分钟 Apgar<7 和新生儿重症监护病房入院。未来的研究应包括对结局的盲法评估,使用连续数据进行校准分析,并评估替代截断点。