Small for gestational age is usually defined as an infant with a birthweight <10th centile for a population or customized standard. Fetal growth restriction refers to a fetus that has failed to reach its biological growth potential because of placental dysfunction. Small-for-gestational-age babies make up 28-45% of nonanomalous stillbirths, and have a higher chance of neurodevelopmental delay, childhood and adult obesity, and metabolic disease. The majority of small-for-gestational-age babies are not recognized before birth. Improved identification, accompanied by surveillance and timely delivery, is associated with reduction in small-for-gestational-age stillbirths. Internationally and regionally, detection of small for gestational age and management of fetal growth problems vary considerably. The aim of this review is to: summarize areas of consensus and controversy between recently published national guidelines on small for gestational age or fetal growth restriction; highlight any recent evidence that should be incorporated into existing guidelines; and identify future research priorities in this field. A search of MEDLINE, Google, and the International Guideline Library identified 6 national guidelines on management of pregnancies complicated by fetal growth restriction/small for gestational age published from 2010 onwards. There is general consensus between guidelines (at least 4 of 6 guidelines in agreement) in early pregnancy risk selection, and use of low-dose aspirin for women with major risk factors for placental insufficiency. All highlight the importance of smoking cessation to prevent small for gestational age. While there is consensus in recommending fundal height measurement in the third trimester, 3 specify the use of a customized growth chart, while 2 recommend McDonald rule. Routine third-trimester scanning is not recommended for small-for-gestational-age screening, while women with major risk factors should have serial scanning in the third trimester. Umbilical artery Doppler studies in suspected small-for-gestational-age pregnancies are universally advised, however there is inconsistency in the recommended frequency for growth scans after diagnosis of small for gestational age/fetal growth restriction (2-4 weekly). In late-onset fetal growth restriction (≥32 weeks) general consensus is to use cerebral Doppler studies to influence surveillance and/or delivery timing. Fetal surveillance methods (most recommend cardiotocography) and recommended timing of delivery vary. There is universal agreement on the use of corticosteroids before birth at <34 weeks, and general consensus on the use of magnesium sulfate for neuroprotection in early-onset fetal growth restriction (<32 weeks). Most guidelines advise using cardiotocography surveillance to plan delivery in fetal growth restriction <32 weeks. The recommended gestation at delivery for fetal growth restriction with absent and reversed end-diastolic velocity varies from 32 to ≥34 weeks and 30 to ≥34 weeks, respectively. Overall, where there is high-q...
In our general obstetric population, birthweight customization identified more SGA infants at risk of perinatal mortality and morbidity compared with the INTERGROWTH-21st standard. The INTERGROWTH-21st standard failed to detect many at-risk SGA infants, particularly among ethnic groups with larger maternal size while disproportionately identifying higher rates of SGA among those with smaller maternal size. Local validation is needed prior to implementation of the INTERGROWTH-21st standard to avoid misclassification of infant birth size.
Background
Maternal supine going-to-sleep position has been associated with increased risk of late stillbirth (≥ 28 weeks), but it is unknown if the risk differs between right and left side, and if some pregnancies are more vulnerable.
Methods
Systematic searches were undertaken for an individual-level participant data (IPD) meta-analysis of case–control studies, prospective cohort studies and randomised trials undertaken up until 26 Jan, 2018, that reported data on maternal going-to-sleep position and stillbirth. Participant inclusion criteria included gestation ≥ 28 weeks', non-anomalous, singleton pregnancies. The primary outcome was stillbirth. A one-stage approach stratified by study and site was used for the meta-analysis. The interaction between supine going-to-sleep position and fetal vulnerability was assessed by bi-variable regression. The multivariable model was adjusted for a priori confounders. Registration number: PROSPERO, CRD42017047703.
Findings
Six case–control studies were identified, with data obtained from five (cases, n = 851; controls, n = 2257). No data was provided by a sixth study (cases, n = 100; controls, n = 200). Supine going-to-sleep position was associated with increased odds of late stillbirth (adjusted odds ratio [aOR] 2.63, 95% CI 1.72–4.04, p < 0.0001) compared with left side. Right side had similar odds to left (aOR 1.04, 95% CI 0.83–1.31, p = 0.75). There were no significant interactions between supine going-to-sleep position and assessed indicators of fetal vulnerability, including small-for-gestational-age infants (p = 0.32), maternal obesity (p = 0.08), and smoking (p = 0.86). The population attributable risk for supine going-to-sleep position was 5.8% (3.2–9.2).
Interpretation
This IPD meta-analysis confirms that supine going-to-sleep position is independently associated with late stillbirth. Going-to-sleep on left or right side appears equally safe. No significant interactions with our assessed indicators of fetal vulnerability were identified, therefore, supine going-to-sleep position can be considered a contributing factor for late stillbirth in all pregnancies. This finding could reduce late stillbirth by 5.8% if every pregnant woman ≥ 28 weeks' gestation settled to sleep on her side.
scite is a Brooklyn-based organization that helps researchers better discover and understand research articles through Smart Citations–citations that display the context of the citation and describe whether the article provides supporting or contrasting evidence. scite is used by students and researchers from around the world and is funded in part by the National Science Foundation and the National Institute on Drug Abuse of the National Institutes of Health.