CUSTOMISED FETAL GROWTH CHARTS VERSUS POPULATION-BASED GROWTH CHARTS IN IDENTIFYING ADVERSE FETAL OUTCOMES: A SYSTEMATIC REVIEW

customized fetal growth chart review

  • Muhammad Za’im Sahul Hameed UNIVERSITI KEBANGSAAN MALAYSIA
  • Rosnah Sutan community health department, medical faculty, University kebangsaan Malaysia
  • Zaleha Abdullah Mahdy UNIVERSITI KEBANGSAAN MALAYSIA
Keywords: customized fetal growth chart, fetal growth restriction, population-based growth chart, small for gestational age, stillbirths, low birth weight

Abstract

One for all antenatal growth charts may not adequately capture risks for adverse fetal outcomes. This review appraises studies on customised growth curves in preventing adverse fetal effects and compares them with population-based growth charts. A review was done on articles published in PubMed database, Cochrane database and Google Scholar. The search criteria were English written described fetal outcomes using a customised fetal growth chart published between 2007 and 2020. All selected articles reported antenatal follow-up data and compared the intervention using the customised antenatal growth chart to the population-based antenatal growth chart. The primary outcome measure was the incidence of small for gestational age (SGA) and stillbirths. The feasibility of using a customised fetal growth chart versus a population-based fetal growth chart was assessed as the process indicator. Twenty-two articles comparing the use of customised growth charts to population-based growth charts were found. Sixteen studies depicted a significant improvement in the detection of pathological SGA over a population-based growth chart ,and another two studies showed significant in detecting large gestational age (LGA). In conclusion, the customised growth charts improve the detection of pathological SGA antenatally. The feasibility of the intervention depends on the training, policy, infrastructure, staffing, awareness and ethics. A   summarised framework analysis for implementing customised growth charts is proposed for future research.

References

Mongelli M, Gardosi J. Gestation-adjusted projection of estimated fetal weight. Acta Obstet Gynecol Scand 1996; 75(1): 28-31.

Chia CC, Huang SCC. Overview of fetal growth retardation/restriction, Taiwanese Journal of Obstetrics and Gynecology 2014;53(3):435-440, ISSN 1028-4559, https://doi.org/10.1016/j.tjog.2014.01.003.

Olisova K, Sung CY, Li YY, Hsia CC, Chang TY. Does one size fit all? A call to establish

Taiwanese fetal growth standards. Taiwanese Journal of Obstetrics and Gynecology 2020; 59(3):468, ISSN 1028-4559, https://doi.org/10.1016/j.tjog.2020.03.027.

Gelbaya TA, Nardo LG. Customised fetal growth chart: a systematic review. J Obstet Gynaecol 2005;25(5):445-50.

Chiossi G, Pedroza C, Costantine MM, Truong VTT, Gargano G, Saade GR. Customised vs population-based growth charts to identify neonates at risk of adverse outcome: a systematic review and Bayesian meta-analysis of observational studies. Ultrasound Obstet Gynecol 2017;50(2): 156-166.

Alexander GR, Kogan MD, Himes JH, Mor JM, Goldenberg R. Racial differences in birthweight for gestational age and infant mortality in extremely-low-risk US populations. Paediatr Perinat Epidemiol 1999;13(2):205-17.

Hanley GE,Janssen PA. Ethnicity-specific birthweight distributions improve the identification of term newborns at risk for short-term morbidity. Am J Obstet Gynecol 2013;209(5): 428.e1-6.

Kierans WJ,Joseph K,Luo ZC, Platt R, Wilkins R, Kramer MS. Does one size fit all? The case for ethnic-specific standards of fetal growth. BMC Pregnancy and Childbirth; 2008:8(1):1.

WHO. International statistical classification of diseases and related health problems. 2009. https://www.who.int/classifications/icd/ICD10Volume2_en_2010.pdf

Gaillard R, de Ridder MA, Verburg BO, et al. Individually customised fetal weight charts derived from ultrasound measurements: the Generation R Study. European Journal Of Epidemiology 2011;26(12):919-926.

Zeve D, Regelmann MO, Holzman IR, et al. Small at Birth, but How Small? The Definition of SGA Revisited. Hormone Research in Paediatrics 2016;86(5):357-360.

Lindström L, Wikström AK, Bergman E, et al. Born small for gestational age and poor school performance–how small is too small? Hormone Research in Paediatrics 2017;88(3,4):215-223.

Usher R, McLean F. Intrauterine growth of live-born Caucasian infants at sea level: standards obtained from measurements in 7 dimensions of infants born between 25 and 44 weeks. The Journal of Paediatrics 1969;74(6):901-910.

Seeds JW, Peng T. Impaired growth and risk of fetal death: is the tenth percentile the appropriate standard? American Journal of Obstetrics and Gynaecology 1998;178(4):658-669.

Odibo AO, Cahill AG, Odibo L,et al. Prediction of intrauterine fetal death in small-for-gestational-age fetuses: impact of including ultrasound biometry in customised models. Ultrasound in Obstetrics and Gynaecology 2012;39(3):288-292.

Vohr BR, Wright LL, Dusick AM, et al. Neurodevelopmental and functional outcomes of deficient birth weight infants in the National Institute of Child Health and Human Development Neonatal Research Network, 1993–1994. Paediatrics 2000;105(6):1216-1226.

Carberry AE, Gordon A, Bond DM,et al. Customised versus population-based growth charts as a screening tool for detecting small gestational age infants in low-risk pregnant women. Cochrane Database of Systematic Reviews 2014; 1(5) Art. No.: CD008549. DOI: 10.1002/14651858.CD008549.pub3

Moher D, Liberati A, Tetzlaff J, et al. Preferred reporting items for systematic reviews and meta-analyses: the PRISMA statement. PLoS Med 2009;6(7):e1000097.

Hong QN, Pluye P, Fàbregues S, et al. Mixed Methods

Appraisal Tool (MMAT), version 2018. Registration of Copyright (#1148552), Canadian

Intellectual Property Office, Industry Canada. http://mixedmethodsappraisaltoolpublic.pbworks.com/w/file/127916259/MMAT_2018_criteria-manual_2018-08-01_ENG.pdf

Carberry AE, Raynes-Greenow CH, Turner RM,et al. Customised versus population-based birth weight charts for detecting neonatal growth and perinatal morbidity in a cross-sectional study of term neonates. American Journal of Epidemiology 2013;178(8):1301-1308.

Lauring JR, Gupta M, Kunselman AR,et al. Identification of minor for gestational age by population-based and customised growth charts in newborns of obese and normal-weight primiparous women. The Journal of Maternal-Fetal & Neonatal Medicine 2016;29(21):3570-3574.

Law TL, Katikaneni LD, Taylor SN, et al. Customised versus population-based growth curves: prediction of low body fat per cent at term corrected gestational age following preterm birth. The Journal of Maternal-Fetal & Neonatal Medicine 2012;25(7):1142-1147.

Charkaluk ML, Marchand-Martin L, Ego A, et al. The influence of fetal growth reference standards on assessment of cognitive and academic outcomes of very preterm children. The Journal of Paediatrics 2012;161(6):1053-1058.

Chen Y, Wu L, Zou L,et al. Update on the birth weight standard and its diagnostic value in small for gestational age (SGA) infants in China. The Journal of Maternal-Fetal & Neonatal Medicine 2017;30(7):801-807.

Gardosi J, Francis A, Turner S,et al. Customized growth charts: rationale, validation and clinical benefits. AJOG expert review 2018;218(2) S609-S618. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ajog.2017.12.011

Albu R, Horhoianu IA, Dumitrascu MC,et al. Growth assessment in the diagnosis of Fetal Growth Restriction. Review. Journal of Medicine and Life 2014;7(2):150-154

Ghi T, Prefumo F, Fichera A,et al. Development of customised fetal growth charts in twins. American Journal of Obstetrics and Gynaecology 2017;216(5):514.e1-514.e17.

Tinelli A, Bochicchio MA, Vaira L, et al. Ultrasonographic fetal growth charts: an informatics approach by quantitative analysis of the impact of ethnicity on diagnoses based on a preliminary report on Salentinian population. BioMed research international 2014;2014;1-10.

Stirnemann JJ, Benoist G, Salomon LJ, et al. Optimal risk assessment of small‐for‐gestational‐age fetuses using 31–34‐week biometry in a low‐risk population. Ultrasound in Obstetrics and Gynecology 2014;43(3):311-316.

González González NL, Plasencia W, González Dávila E,et al. The effect of customized growth charts on the identification of large for gestational age newborns. The Journal of Maternal-Fetal and Neonatal Medicine 2013;26(1):62-65.

Espinoza J, Lee W, Martin SR, et al. Customised growth curves for identification of large-for-gestational-age neonates in pre‐eclamptic women. Ultrasound in Obstetrics and Gynecology 2014;43(2):165-169.

González González NL, González Dávila E, Cabrera F,et al. Customized weight curves for Spanish fetuses and newborns. The Journal of Maternal-Fetal and Neonatal Medicine 2014;27(14):1495-1499.

Odibo AO, Francis A, Cahill AG,et al. Association between pregnancy complications and small-for-gestational-age birth weight defined by customised fetal growth standard versus a population-based standard. The Journal of Maternal-Fetal and Neonatal Medicine 2011;24(3): 411-417.

Schmidt P, Staboulidou I, Soergel P,et al. Individualized growth charts for ultrasound measurements can significantly improve fetal monitoring. Archives of Gynaecology and Obstetrics 2007;276(4):315-321.

Fernández-Alba JJ, González-Macías C, León Del Pino R, et al. Customized versus population-based birth weight references for predicting fetal and neonatal Undernutrition. Fetal Diagnosis and Therapy 2016;39(3):198-208.

Poljak B, Agarwal U, Jackson R, et al. Diagnostic accuracy of individual antenatal tools for predicting small-for-gestational-age at birth. Ultrasound in Obstetrics and Gynecology 2017;49(4): 493-499.

Radhika B, Suseela V, Nirmalan P. Identification of Fetal Growth Patterns with Customized Growth Charts: A prospective study in South India. International Journal of Infertility and Fetal Medicine 2015;6(1):30-34.

Khandaker S. Assessment of Antepartum Fetal Growth by Customized "GROW" Curves Versus Non-customised Growth Curves in Correlation with Neonatal Growth Pattern. J Obstet Gynaecol India 2014;64(3):189-92.

Fernández-Alba JJ, Soto Pazos E, Moreno Cortés R, et al.INTERGROWTH21st vs customised fetal growth curves in the assessment of the neonatal nutritional status: a retrospective cohort study of gestational diabetes. BMC Pregnancy and Childbirth 2020;20(1):1-9. https://doi.org/10.1186/s12884-020-2845-y.

Maso G, Jayawardane MAMM, Alberico S,et al. The Implications of Diagnosis of Small for Gestational Age Fetuses Using European and South Asian Growth Charts: An Outcome-Based Comparative Study. The Scientific World Journal 2014; 2014(1):1-5.

Sovio U, Smith GCS, The effect of customisation and use of a fetal growth standard on the association between birthweight percentile and adverse perinatal outcome. Am J Obstet Gynecol 2018;218(2s):S738-s744.

Vikraman SK, Elayedatt RA. Prospective Comparative Evaluation of Performance of Fetal Growth Charts in the Diagnosis of Suboptimal Fetal Growth During Third Trimester Ultrasound Examination in an Unselected South Indian Antenatal Population. Journal of Fetal Medicine 2020;7(2):103-110.

Ghi T, Cariello L, Rizzo L, et al. Customised fetal growth charts for parents' characteristics, race, and parity by quantile regression analysis: a cross‐sectional multicenter Italian study. Journal of Ultrasound in Medicine 2016;35(1): 83-92.

Gardosi JFA. Customised Antenatal Growth Chart – GROW-Chart v 7.5, 2009. Available from: http://www.gestation.net/growthcharts.htm.

Published
2021-12-28
How to Cite
Sahul Hameed, muhammad zaim, Sutan, R., & abdullah mahdy, zaleha. (2021). CUSTOMISED FETAL GROWTH CHARTS VERSUS POPULATION-BASED GROWTH CHARTS IN IDENTIFYING ADVERSE FETAL OUTCOMES: A SYSTEMATIC REVIEW. Malaysian Journal of Public Health Medicine, 21(3), 136-144. https://doi.org/10.37268/mjphm/vol.21/no.3/art.1167