Estimating fetal weights less than 2000 g: an accurate and simple method

Weinberger, Ed; Cyr,; Hirsch, JH; Richardson, Thomas; Hanson, JA; Mack, L A

doi:10.2214/ajr.142.5.973

Cited by 20 publications

(21 citation statements)

References 23 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…Biometric data on each of the 119 fetuses were used to evaluate the accuracy of ten published fetal weight formulas (table 1). The choice of these formulas was based on the following considerations: (A) the formulas of Campbell [14] and Shepard [2] were the first to be published and have been used as a reference in most studies relating to sonographic estimation of fetal weight; (B) the formulas of Rose [5], Hadlock [3] and Sabbagha [16] are those which, in our experience, show the best accuracy for fetuses born at term or close to term, and (C) the formulas of Weiner [6], Scott [7], Thurnau [8], Mielke [9] and Weinberger [10] were specifically developed for very premature and/or very-low-weight fetuses.…”

Section: Methodsmentioning

confidence: 99%

See 1 more Smart Citation

Validity of Sonographic Formulas for Estimating Fetal Weight below 1,250 g: A Series of 119 Cases

Jouannic

Grangé²,

Goffinet³

et al. 2001

Fetal Diagn Ther

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Objective: The aim of this study was to determine the accuracy of sonographic methods for estimating fetal weight <1,250 g on the basis of ten published formulas falling into two principal categories: general formulas applied to all fetuses, and formulas specifically developed for very-low-weight fetuses. Methods: Recent biometric data (obtained less than 7 days before birth) on 119 fetuses weighing <1,250 g were used retrospectively. Estimated fetal weights derived from ten published formulas were compared to actual weights. For each equation, the errors in predicting fetal weight were used to calculate mean percentage error and standard deviation of the mean error. The t test was used to determine whether the mean errors were significatively different from zero. The F test was used to determine if there were significant differences in the standard deviation of the mean errors. Results: The mean birth weight of infants was 956 ± (SD) 183 g at a gestational age of 29 ± (SD) 2.3 weeks. The best three formulas were the Hadlock, Sabbagha and Mielke which generated a mean error of –0.25, 2.81 and 0.29 not statistically different from zero with standard deviations of 13.02, 9.14 and 11.96, which were not statistically different. Conclusion: In our population of very-low-birth-weight infants, the use of specific formulas targeted to those fetuses does not provide a more accurate estimation of fetal weight.

show abstract

Section: Methodsmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…less relevant to very low birth weight infants. Therefore, some authors have sought to develop new formulas specifically adapted to highly premature and/or very-lowweight fetuses [6][7][8][9][10].…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Validity of Sonographic Formulas for Estimating Fetal Weight below 1,250 g: A Series of 119 Cases

Jouannic

Grangé²,

Goffinet³

et al. 2001

Fetal Diagn Ther

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…A correlation matrix between BW and BPD, AC, and EFW is seen in table I. The best correlation is achieved when BPD and AC are subjected to logarithmic transforma tion according to the equation of Shepard et al [1], In fetal weights less than 2,500 g the equations created by Thurnau et al [2] and Weinberger et al [3] are even more accu rate. In table II the analysis of the total material (n = 310) is demonstrated.…”

Section: Resultsmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…The original index population is from the USA. Furthermore we wanted to compare it with two simple equa tions for fetal weight estimation described by Thurnau et al [2] and Weinberger et al [3], especially designed for fetuses weighing less than 2,500 g.…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Fetal Weight Prediction by Ultrasound Measurements

Bistoletti¹

1986

Gynecol Obstet Invest

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Fetal weight prediction with ultrasonic measurements of biparietal diameter (BPD) and abdominal circumference (AC) using the equation by Shepard et al. [1982] was tested prospectively in 310 fetuses. Fetuses of all weight categories were included. The error of weight prediction was in the range of+684 to –880 g. One SD of prediction error was 242 g or 8.5% of birth weight. An overestimation was seen in a fetus with a birth weight of less than 2,500 g (1 SD = 183 g or 10% of birth weight). An underestimation could be observed in a fetus with a birth weight of more than 4,000 g (1 SD = 259 g or 5.7% of birth weight). The use of a combination of BPD and AC is more accurate than the use of each of these parameters. In a fetus with a birth weight of less than 2,500 g, the equations by Thurnau et al. [1983] and Weinberger et al. [1984] are of equal clinical value. The method of Shepard et al. should be complemented with measurements of the ‘cephalic index’ to exclude fetuses with brachycephaly or dolichocephaly, but one should be aware that the variability of weight prediction is high (2 SD = 11.4–19.8% of birth weight).

show abstract

“…The formulas described appear to offer greater accura cy in the estimation of the weight of very preterm fetuses than previously described formulas. Weinberger et al [18] developed a formula on the basis of 41 cases with birth weights between 500 and 2,000 g. When their formula was tested on the same group of subjects, the estimated weight was found to lie within 15% of the actual birth weight in 85.3% of the cases. Roberts et al [ 19] developed a logarithmic formula for low birth weight fetuses on the basis of 50 cases, amongst which only 9 fetuses weighed less than 1,000 g. Medchill et al [20] tested 20 published formulas retrospectively on 76 neonates with birth weights between 500 and 1,000 g. This study, the most extensive evaluation of formulas for this weight range to have been published, found no single formula to be signif icantly more accurate.…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

An Accurate Method for Sonographic Estimation of the Weight of Very Preterm Fetuses

Mielke

Pietsch-Breitfeld²,

Regele³

et al. 1997

Gynecol Obstet Invest

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

This study was undertaken to test the accuracy of formulas we recently developed for the sonographic estimation of the weight of very preterm fetuses. The formulas were used to determine estimated weights from prenatal sonographic data for 62 premature infants born at 23–29 weeks of gestation, weight < 1,400 g. The mean absolute deviation of the actual birth weight from the estimated weight was 75.8 ± (SD) 68.5 g, the mean percent deviation +0.60% and the absolute mean percent deviation 8.1 ± (SD) 5.6%; 90.3% of the birth weights lay within 15% of the estimated weight. The model described represents an accurate method for prenatal estimation of the weight of very preterm fetuses.

show abstract

Estimating fetal weights less than 2000 g: an accurate and simple method

Cited by 20 publications

References 23 publications

Validity of Sonographic Formulas for Estimating Fetal Weight below 1,250 g: A Series of 119 Cases

Validity of Sonographic Formulas for Estimating Fetal Weight below 1,250 g: A Series of 119 Cases

Fetal Weight Prediction by Ultrasound Measurements

An Accurate Method for Sonographic Estimation of the Weight of Very Preterm Fetuses

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About