Die fetale Biometrie im 2. und 3. Trimenon – einfach oder doch kompliziert?

• References

• 1 Salomon LJ, Alfirevic Z, Da Silva Costa F. et al. ISUOG Practice Guidelines: ultrasound assessment of fetal biometry and growth. Ultrasound Obstet Gynecol Ultrasound Obstet Gynecol 2019; 53: 715-723
• 2 Chitty LS, Altman DG, Henderson A. et al. Charts of fetal size: 2. Head measurements. Br J Obstet Gynaecol 1994; 101: 35-43
• 3 John Dudley N. Are ultrasound foetal circumference measurement methods interchangeable?. Ultrasound 2019; 27: 176-182
• 4 Kurmanavicius J, Wright EM, Royston P. et al. Fetal ultrasound biometry: 1. Head reference values. Br J Obstet Gynaecol 1999; 106: 126-135
• 5 Drukker L, Droste R, Chatelain P. et al. Expected-value bias in routine third-trimester growth scans. Ultrasound Obstet Gynecol Ultrasound Obstet Gynecol 2020; 55: 375-382
• 6 Hadlock FP, Harrist RB, Sharman RS. et al. Estimation of fetal weight with the use of head, body, and femur measurements – a prospective study. Am J Obstet Gynecol 1985; 151: 333-337
• 7 Kurmanavicius J, Burkhardt T, Wisser J. et al. Ultrasonographic fetal weight estimation: Accuracy of formulas and accuracy of examiners by birth weight from 500 to 5000 g. J Perinat Med 2004; 32: 155-161
• 8 Gleason JL, Reddy UM, Chen Z. et al. Comparing population-based fetal growth standards in a US cohort. Am J Obstet Gynecol 2024; 231: 338.e1-338.e18
• 9 Melamed N, Hiersch L, Aviram A. et al. Diagnostic accuracy of fetal growth charts for placenta-related fetal growth restriction. Placenta 2021; 105: 70-77
• 10 Sovio U, White IR, Dacey A. et al. Screening for fetal growth restriction with universal third trimester ultrasonography in nulliparous women in the Pregnancy Outcome Prediction (POP) study: a prospective cohort study. Lancet 2015; 386: 2089-2097