Foetal growth parameters—Clinical versus ultrasonographic

Berry, Manorama; Coyaji, Kurus; Gogoi, M.P.; Kodkany, Bhala; Parikh, K. S.; Patel, Dr.Pushpendra Kumar; Rawal, Manoj; Sengupta, Pinaki; Walvekar, V.; Dhillon, Balwan Singh; Kambo, I; Nair, Abhilasha; Saxena, B.N.; Saxena, N.C.

doi:10.1007/bf02760907

Cited by 2 publications

(3 citation statements)

References 5 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…BPD, AC and FL were measured every 4 weeks from 20-36 weeks of gestation and bi-weekly thereafter. A paper based on a multicentre study conducted by Indian Council of Medical Research during 1984-87, with the objective of developing norms for clinical and ultrasonographic parameters of foetal growth and comparing their utility was published in 1992 (Berry et al, 1992). This study was conducted at 9 sites in 6 cities (Table 2), and curves were generated for AC, FL and fundal height.…”

Section: These Charts Typically Provide Foetal Growth Data Beginning mentioning

confidence: 99%

“…Hence, this data is definitely not very useful for identifying abnormal growth of Indian foetuses. Few obstetricians and radiologists use the data on foetal AC, BPD, FL and HC generated by Indian studies, such as; that by Berry et al, 1992. The practice at several centres is to calculate estimated foetal weight from foetal biometry and compare it with a local reference chart based on measurements at birth (described in the next section) for classifying foetuses as normal growth restricted or macrosomic.…”

Section: These Charts Typically Provide Foetal Growth Data Beginning mentioning

confidence: 99%

“…1461 representative of the population, old or methodologically inaccurate. Of the available foetal ultrasonography based Indian foetal growth references, the data from the paper by ICMR multicentric study (Berry et al, 1992) is fairly good, and is being used by many ultrasonologists and obstetricians. However, there are limitations in that gestational age assessment is not very accurate, curves have been provided only for two foetal dimensions, and the data is nearly three decades old.…”

Section: Gestational Diabetes Mellitusmentioning

confidence: 99%

See 2 more Smart Citations

Foetal Growth Standards:Does one Size Fit All?

Jain¹

2016

Proceedings of the Indian National Science Academy

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Antenatal ultrasonography to monitor foetal growth and well-being is an essential component of obstetric care. Measurement of foetal anthropometric parameters including head circumference, bi-parietal diameter, abdominal circumference and femur length, and the estimated foetal weight derived from these parameters is used for diagnosing restricted or excessive foetal growth and congenital anomalies, such as, small or large head size and skeletal dysplasias. These diagnoses have major therapeutic implications.Thus, it is quite imperative that the reference data should be accurate and representative of the population for which it is being used. There are two major categories of foetal growth charts-those based on serial foetal measurements by ultrasonography, and those based on measurements at birth plotted against gestational age based on last menstrual period. Many different charts of both categories are currently being used to serve as reference normative data. Recently, Intergrowth-21 st Consortium has published international foetal growth standards, based on prospectively collected foetal biometric data. The study has been conducted with highly standardized methodology on healthy, affluent, low-risk pregnant women in 8 countries, including India. For the present paper, we have reviewed the merits and drawbacks of these standards, as well as, several other Indian and international charts. None of the currently available charts come up to our expectations from an 'ideal' foetal growth chart. We suggest that for a country of our magnitude and diversity, there is an urgent need to construct our national foetal growth standards based on carefully selected population and using robust techniques and methodology.

show abstract

Section: These Charts Typically Provide Foetal Growth Data Beginning mentioning

confidence: 99%

Section: These Charts Typically Provide Foetal Growth Data Beginning mentioning

confidence: 99%

Section: Gestational Diabetes Mellitusmentioning

confidence: 99%

See 1 more Smart Citation

Foetal Growth Standards:Does one Size Fit All?

Jain¹

2016

Proceedings of the Indian National Science Academy

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

Which growth charts to use to classify neonates as small-for-gestational age at birth?

Anand¹,

Sahoo²,

Gulla³

2019

Indian J Child Health

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

The use of correct growth chart at birth is crucial to identify small-for-gestational age (SGA) neonates since the burden of SGA is an indicator of national health status and hence has programmatic implications. With multitude of charts available globally and in context of recent introduction of newer standard charts (Intergrowth-21st), it is important to understand the merits and demerits of different types of neonatal charts in clinical application. The current review summarizes the available growth charts and discusses the advantages and disadvantages of each of them. We conclude that most of the available growth charts either overestimate or underestimate the neonatal growth, both of which are unacceptable. Hence, it is essential to devise region specific growth charts. In case of unavailability of the regional growth charts, the global charts should be used cautiously.

show abstract

Foetal growth parameters—Clinical versus ultrasonographic

Cited by 2 publications

References 5 publications

Foetal Growth Standards:Does one Size Fit All?

Foetal Growth Standards:Does one Size Fit All?

Which growth charts to use to classify neonates as small-for-gestational age at birth?

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About